GROUP A ELEMENTS: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
1. TITLE AND APPROVAL SHEETS
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Revision 2
For
PROJECT NAME:
Kings River Experimental Watershed: Monitoring and
Restoration of Forest Ecosystems
Grant Agreement No :
USFS Agreement No.
Date:
04-186-555-0
05-CO-11272164-025
July
2006
NAME OF RESPONSIBLE ORGANIZATION :
Sierra Nevada Research Center, Fresno
Pacific Southwest Research Station
Forest Service
U.S. Department of Agriculture
APPROVAL SIGNATURES
(Add or delete signature lines as needed)
GRANT ORGANIZATION:
Title:
Name:
Signature:
Project Manager
Carolyn T. Hunsaker, PSW,
Fresno
QA Officer
James Baldwin, PSW, Albany
Date*:
REGIONAL BOARD (SWRCB**):
Title:
Name:
Contract Manager, Fresno
Anthony L. Toto
QA Officer, Sacramento
Leticia Valadez
Signature:
Date*:
* This is a contractual document. The signature dates indicate the earliest date when the project can start.
** If the QAPP is being prepared under the jurisdiction of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) rather than a
Regional Board, substitute the appropriate SWRCB information for the RWQCB information.
2
2. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page:
Group A Elements: Project Management ..................................................................................................................... 1
1. Title and Approval Sheets ........................................................................................................................................ 1
2. Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................................... 3
3. Distribution List........................................................................................................................................................ 5
4. Project/Task Organization ........................................................................................................................................ 6
5. Problem Definition/Background ............................................................................................................................... 9
6. Project/Task Description………………………………………………………………………………………….12
7. Quality Objectives and Criteria for Measurement Data ......................................................................................... 17
8. Special Training Needs/Certification ..................................................................................................................... 19
9. Documents And Records ........................................................................................................................................ 20
Group B: Data Generation and Acquisition ................................................................................................................ 22
10. Sampling Process Design ..................................................................................................................................... 22
11. Sampling Methods ................................................................................................................................................ 23
12. Sample Handling and Custody ............................................................................................................................. 25
13. Analytical Methods………………………………………………………………………………...…………….26
14. Quality Control ..................................................................................................................................................... 27
15. Instrument/Equipment Testing, Inspection, and Maintenance.............................................................................. 29
16. Instrument/Equipment Calibration and Frequency ............................................................................................... 30
17. Inspection/Acceptance of supplies and Consumables .......................................................................................... 31
18. Non-Direct Measurements (Existing Data) .......................................................................................................... 32
19. Data Management ................................................................................................................................................. 33
Group C: Assessment and Oversight .......................................................................................................................... 34
20. Assessments & Response Actions ........................................................................................................................ 34
21. Reports to Management ........................................................................................................................................ 35
Group D: Data Validation and Usability ..................................................................................................................... 36
22. Data Review, Verification, and Validation Requirements .................................................................................... 36
23. Verification and Validation Methods ................................................................................................................... 37
24. Reconciliation with User Requirements ............................................................................................................... 38
3
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Organizational chart.......................................................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 2. KREW location map. ...................................................................................................................................................... 16
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. (Element 4) Personnel responsibilities. .............................................................................................................................. 6
Table 2. (Element 6) Project schedule timeline.............................................................................................................................. 14
Table 3. (Element 7) Data quality objectives for field measurements. ........................................................................................... 18
Table 4. (Element 7) Data quality objectives for laboratory measurements. .................................................................................. 18
Table 5. (Element 9) Document and record retention, archival, and disposition information. ....................................................... 20
Table 6. (Element 11) Sampling locations and type codes.. ........................................................................................................... 24
Table 7. (Element 13) Field analytical methods. ............................................................................................................................ 26
Table 8. (Element 13) Laboratory analytical methods. .................................................................................................................. 26
Table 9. (Element 14) Sampling (Field) QC. ................................................................................................................................. 27
Table 10. (Element 14) Analytical QC. .......................................................................................................................................... 28
Table 11. (Element 15) Testing, inspection, maintenance of sampling equipment and analytical instruments. ............................. 29
Table 12. (Element 16) Testing, inspection, maintenance of sampling equipment and analytical instruments. ............................. 30
Table 13. (Element 17) Inspection/acceptance testing requirements for consumables and supplies. ............................................. 31
Table 14. (Element 21) QA management reports. .......................................................................................................................... 35
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A. KREW Forms and Custom Standard Operating Procedures. .................................................................................... 39
Item 1. Codes for samples ............................................................................................................................................................... 40
Item 2. Chain of custody. ................................................................................................................................................................ 43
Item 3. Database status by year ....................................................................................................................................................... 44
Item 4. Oakton meter calibration .................................................................................................................................................... 46
Item 5. Prenart site sampling procedure .......................................................................................................................................... 49
Item 6. Traceable freezer thermometer ........................................................................................................................................... 54
Item 7. Flow site sampling procedure ............................................................................................................................................. 56
Appendix B. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Aquatic Invertebrate Bioassessment Monitoring .............................................. 64
Appendix C. Periphyton Quality Assurance and Quality Control. ................................................................................................. 81
Appendix D. Riverside Chemistry Laboratory's Analytical Methods. ........................................................................................... 85
4
3. DISTRIBUTION LIST
(If the QAPP is being prepared under the jurisdiction of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) rather than a
Regional Board (RWQCB), substitute the SWRCB information for the RWQCB information.)
Title:
Name (Affiliation):
Tel. No.:
QAPP No*:
Carolyn T. Hunsaker
559-323-3211
1
James Baldwin
510-559-6332
1
Regional Board Contract Manager
Anthony L. Toto
559-445-6278
Original
Regional Water Board QA Officer
SNRC Program Manager
Riverside Chemistry Lab
University of CA Santa Barbara
U.S. Geological Survey
Leticia E. Valadez
Peter Stine
Pamela Padgett
David Herbst
Larry Brown
916-464-4634
530-759-1703
951-680-1584
760-935-4536
916-278-3098
1
1
1
1
1
Contractor Project Manager
Contractor QA Officer
5
4. PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION
4.1 Involved parties and roles.
The Pacific Southwest Research Station (PSW), Sierra Nevada Research Center of the Forest Service is the lead research
institution for this project. Dr. Carolyn Hunsaker, research ecologist, is the Project Manager for the Forest Service and is
responsible for project design, field sampling, data analyses, publication, and initiation and maintenance of contracts with
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the University of California, Santa Barbara. Tom Whitaker, hydrologist, and
Jessica Auman, chemist, are Dr. Hunsaker’s field and lab supervisors in Fresno.
The PSW chemistry laboratory in Riverside performs all chemistry analyses funded by the state of California. Dr. Pamela
Padgett is the scientist that oversees the chemistry laboratory technician(s) performing analyses for this project. Her duties
include quality assurance for the chemistry analyses and reporting. The laboratory will analyze submitted samples in
accordance with all method and quality assurance requirements found in this QAPP.
The University of California, Santa Barbara, is the lead research institution for stream invertebrate sampling and taxonomic
identification. Dr. Dave Herbst, Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory (SNARL), is the scientist responsible for this
research and the associated data; SNARL has a SWRCB approved QAPP for invertebrate bioassessment monitoring as used
in this project (see appendix A). The U.S. Geological Survey, Sacramento, is performing the periphyton (algae) sampling.
Dr. Larry Brown is the scientist responsible for these data.
Table 1. (Element 4) Personnel responsibilities.
Name
Organizational Affiliation
Title
Contact Information
(Telephone number, fax
number, email address.)
Dr. Carolyn Hunsaker
Forest Service, U.S. Dept.
Agriculture, Fresno
Research Ecologist
Project Manager
Phone: 559-297-0706 x4849
Fax: 559-294-4810
chunsaker@fs.fed.us
James Baldwin
Forest Service, U.S. Dept.
of Agriculture
Quality Assurance
Officer
Phone: 510-559-6332
Fax: 510-559-6440
jbaldwin@fs.fed.us
Tom Whitaker
Forest Service, U.S. Dept.
Agriculture, Fresno
Hydrologist
Phone: 559-297-0706 x4816
twhitaker@fs.fed.us
Phone: 559-297-0706 x4892
jauman@fs.fed.us
Fax: 559-294-4810
Jessica Auman
Chemist
Field Supervisors
Dr. Pamela Padgett
Dr. David Herbst
Dr. Larry Brown
Forest Service, U.S. Dept.
Agriculture, Riverside
Sierra Nevada Research Lab
Univ. Calif. Santa Barbara
contractor
Water Resources Division
U.S. Geological Survey
Sacramento
contractor
Research Scientist
Chemistry Laboratory
oversight for KREW
Research Scientist
Stream Invertebrates
Research Scientist
Stream Algae
6
Phone: 951-680-1584
Fax: 951-680-1501
ppadgett@fs.fed.us
Phone: 760-935-4536
Fax: 760herbst@lifesci.ucsb.edu
Phone: 916-278-3098
Fax: 916-278-3071
lrbrown@usgs.gov
4.2 Quality Assurance Officer role
James (Jim) Baldwin is a mathematical statistician and the Unit Leader for PSW’s Environmental Statistics Unit. Jim’s role
is to ensure that good quality assurance and quality control procedures are described in this plan and implemented during
sampling, field work, and in-house analysis procedures. Jim is located at PSW Headquarters in Albany, and is not part of
the KREW staff at Fresno. He will work with both Carolyn Hunsaker and Pamela Padgett regarding any quality assurance
issues.
Jim Baldwin will also review and assess all procedures during the life of the contract against QAPP requirements. He will
report all findings to Carolyn Hunsaker, including all requests for corrective action. Jim Baldwin may stop all actions,
including those conducted by the Riverside chemistry laboratory, the Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory, or the
U.S. Geological Survey if there are significant deviations from required practices or if there is evidence of a systematic
failure.
4.3 Persons responsible for QAPP update and maintenance.
Changes and updates to this QAPP may be made after a review of the evidence for change by the Project Manager and
Quality Assurance Officer, and with the concurrence of both the State Board’s Contract Manager and Quality Assurance
Officer. Dr. Hunsaker is responsible for making the changes, submitting drafts for review, preparing a final copy, and
submitting the final for signature. Jessica Auman is responsible for making CD copies of the most current approved QAPP
and mailing the CD’s to the individuals identified in A3.
7
4.4 Organizational chart and responsibilities
Figure 1. Organizational chart.
SWRCB
Grant Manager
Anthony Toto
RWQCB QA Program
Manager, Leticia Valadez
PSW Project Manager
Carolyn Hunsaker
PSW QA Officer
James Baldwin
KREW Field
Supervisors
Tom Whitaker
Jessica Auman
Chemistry Lab
Supervisory
Scientist
KREW Data
Manager
(to be hired)
Pamela Padgett
Supervisory
Scientist
David Hamilton
8
-SNARL Supervisor
David Herbst
-USGS Supervisor
Larry Brown
5. PROBLEM DEFINITION/BACKGROUND
5.1 Problem statement.
The Kings River Experimental Watershed (KREW) is a watershed-level, integrated ecosystem project for headwater
streams in the Sierra Nevada. Eight watersheds have been chosen and fully instrumented to monitor ecosystem changes:
four on the Big Creek drainage, three on the Dinkey Creek drainage, and one that drains directly into the North Fork, Kings
River. Watersheds are located in two groups; the Providence Creek Site is located in mixed-conifer forest from 1500-2120
m (4920-6950 ft) elevation, and the Bull Creek Site is located in red fir/mixed-conifer from 2050-2480 m (6720-8150 ft)
elevation. Each watershed will receive one of three management treatments, or serve as a control. The three treatments will
be uneven-aged group selection thinning, prescribed fire, and a thinning with burn combination. Treatments are scheduled
to begin in 2006 and may last for several seasons as some fire prescriptions call for repeated entries. Therefore, KREW is
designed to continue for at least 15 years of study, providing at least four years of pre-treatment data, several years of posttreatment data, and several seasons of data that span successive treatments. Data collection on KREW began in water year
2002 (1 October 2001) for the Providence Site and water year 2003 for the Bull Site. This research is part of the larger
Kings River Project (draft EIS released January 2006). One watershed occurs on the Teakettle Experimental Forest. For
more information about KREW and Teakettle go to www.fs.fed.us/psw/programs/snrc/water/kingsriver.
Funding in 2005 from the state of California is allowing the addition of two integrating sites (one for Providence Creek and
one for Bull Creek) to evaluate cumulative effects of land management activities. These funds are also adding turbidity
monitoring at all ten locations.
The quality of aquatic, riparian (near-stream area), and meadow ecosystems is directly related to the integrity of adjacent
uplands in their watershed. Forest Service scientists believe that these ecosystems are the most altered and impaired habitats
of the Sierra Nevada primarily because of dams and diversions, overgrazing, roads, logging, and physical alteration.
However, no long-term experimental watershed studies exist in the southern Sierra Nevada. Work began on the Kings
River Experimental Watershed (KREW) in 2000 with data collection starting in October 2002.
KREW has the following objectives.

Quantify the variability in characteristics of stream ecosystems and their associated watersheds.

Evaluate the effects of forest management (prescribed fire and uneven-aged, small-group tree harvesting), while
maintaining older trees, large snags, and large woody debris throughout the landscape.

Maintain a mosaic of vegetation types and ages that mimic, to the extent possible, the historical distribution of
vegetation resulting from frequent, low-intensity fires prevalent before European settlement of the West.
The Sierra Nevada Framework posed several management questions that KREW will address.

What is the effect of fire and fuel reduction treatments (i.e., thinning of trees) on the riparian and stream physical,
chemical, and biological conditions?

Does the use of prescribed fire increase or decrease the rate of erosion (long term versus short term) and affect soil
health and productivity?

How adequate and effective are current stream buffers at protecting aquatic ecosystems?
KREW will also address many basic and applied questions about headwater watersheds, streams, and riparian areas; these
are outlined in detail in the KREW Study Plan (provided as a separate document).
9
5.2 Decisions or outcomes.
Although stream conservation and preservation have recently become the priority of many agencies throughout North
America (Naiman et al. 2000), what is considered appropriate management for forest ecosystems is a point of debate
(USDA Forest Service 2001). Considering the current trends in human population growth and resource consumption, the
protection and conservation of streams and rivers must become a priority for management agencies. Water quantity and
quality is especially important in California's semi-arid climate. National forest land supplies approximately 60-70% of
surface water.
This research project provides the first replicated design of an integrated (physical, chemical, and biological measurement)
watershed experiment in the Sierra Nevada. It provides data on both the characteristics and processes of headwater streams
and their watersheds under current conditions and after management treatments to reduce fuel loads and improve forest
sustainability. These results will be useful to all land management agencies with forested lands on granitic soils where
precipitation occurs as both rain and snow. Forest management activities being evaluated are mechanical thinning,
prescribed underburning, and road maintenance. KREW data will be very useful for calibrating different models (e.g., soil
erosion, fire behavior, climate change effects, air pollution critical loads) and using modeling to predict effects. The KREW
research will provide data that is useful for evaluating many issues including the following.

climate change effects

air pollution effects

multiple stressors (erosion, fire, air pollution, and vegetation removal)

cumulative effects in headwater ecosystems

erosion and sedimentation and the need for total maximum daily loads for forest management practices
5.3 Water quality or regulatory criteria
There are water quality criteria for sediment and turbidity in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin
where the Kings River watershed is located (Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, 1995).
Sediment
The suspended sediment load and suspended sediment discharge rate of waters shall not be altered in such a manner as to
cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.
Turbidity
Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Increases
in turbidity attributable to controllable water quality factors shall not exceed the following limits:

Where natural turbidity is between 0 and 5 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTUs), increases
shall not exceed 1 NTU.

Where natural turbidity is between 5 and 50 NTUs, increases shall not exceed 20 percent.

Where natural turbidity is equal to or between 50 and 100 NTUs, increases shall not exceed 10
NTUs.

Where natural turbidity is greater than 100 NTUs, increases shall not exceed 10 percent.
In determining compliance with the above limits, the Regional Water Board may prescribe appropriate
averaging periods provided that beneficial uses will be fully protected.
10
5.4 References
Naiman, R.J., and R.E. Bilby (eds). 2000. River ecology and management: Lessons from the Pacific Coastal Ecoregion.
Springer-Verlag, New York.
Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, 1995, Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake
Basin (5C). Sacramento, California.
USDA Forest Service. 2001. Sierra Nevada Forest Plan amendment: Final environmental impact statement. USDA Forest
Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Vallejo, California.
11
6. Project/Task Description
6.1 Work statement and produced products.
1. Quality Assurance Project Plan and Monitoring Plan
2. Work To Be Performed by Grantee:
2.1 Project Assessment and Evaluation Plan
2.2 Data Accessibility: Insure that data collected for the Kings River Experimental Watershed (KREW) are of high
quality and are readily accessible to the public, non-profit, and government agencies.
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
Provide quality-assured data (will follow the QAPP plan, written protocols, track chain of custody, screen
for outliers, graph data, provide flags and metadata in databases, etc.). Data will be submitted to a Forest
Service sponsored web harvester, HydroDB (http://www.fsl.orst.edu/climhy/hydrodb).
Design and implement a user-friendly website that describes KREW data (metadata)
Provide regular analysis and data summaries every six (6) months. Summaries will be performed by
Forest Service staff in Fresno for the flow, water chemistry and meteorology data collected for KREW
and placed on HydroDB.
2.3 Cumulative Effects Analysis and Modeling of Sediment and Water Quality: Provide quantitative modeling and
analysis of cumulative effects from mechanical harvesting and prescribed fire. Cumulative effects are often
discussed but seldom quantified due to lack of adequate data. The KREW is being designed to address cumulative
effects.
2.3.1
Evaluate models of stream flow, erosion, biogeochemistry fluxes, and fire behavior. The models used are
in the public domain. Examples are listed of models to be evaluated. The Water Erosion Prediction
Project (WEPP) is an interagency effort to model the processes that lead to erosion (William Elliot,
USDA Forest Service, Moscow, http://forest.moscowfsl.wsu.edu/engr). PnET is a suite of three nested
computer models which provide a modular approach to simulating the carbon, water and nitrogen
dynamics of forest ecosystems (John Aber, University of New Hampshire, http://www.pnet.sr.unh.edu).
FIRE BioGeoChemical process model (FIRE-BGC) is a mechanistic vegetation dynamics model
developed to investigate the role of fire and climate on long-term landscape dynamics (R. Keane, USDA
Forest Service, Missoula, http://eco.wiz.uni-kassel.de/model_db/mdb/fire_bgc.html).
2.3.2
Select one or more models for implementation, if models and KREW data are spatially and temporally
adequate.
2.3.3
Parameterize selected models for KREW watersheds.
2.3.4
Run the models for existing conditions.
2.4 Education and Community Outreach: Improve use and usefulness of watershed information.
2.4.1
Meet with local organizations, including educational institutions, interested in Sierra Nevada watersheds
and identify collaborative efforts. Organizations Interested in Sierra Nevada Watersheds, Yosemite
Sequoia Resource Conservation and Development Council representing Fresno, Madera, Mariposa, and
Tulare Counties with 19 sponsors, Millerton Area Watershed Coalition, Kings River Conservation
District, Friends of the South Fork Kings, Central Sierra Watershed Committee, Sierra Nevada Alliance’s
watershed initiative, Bureau of Reclamation, Army Corps of Engineers, Sierra Nevada Access, MultipleUse & Stewardship Coalition (SAMs), Sierra Foothill Conservancy, University of California, Berkeley,
Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, Dr. Richard Harris, extension forestry specialist, Neil
McDougald, advisor for Fresno and Madera Counties, Fresno area schools with watershed curriculum,
Fresno Central Watershed Education Program, Steve Starcher, Central Sierra Historical Society and
Museum, California Water Institute, California State University Fresno
12
2.4.2
Conduct a workshop to improve the use and usefulness of watershed information from KREW
2.4.3
Conduct a presentation to the California Bay-Delta Science Program/Panel.
2.4.4
Prepare and submit a final draft of any publication, brochure, video or audio tape produced in full or in
part to CALFED and the Grant Manager for review and approval prior to releasing to the general public
or media.
2.5 Integrating Station: Install two (2) integrating stream-monitoring stations. These stations would be used to
evaluate the cumulative effects of forest-management activities on third-order streams. The sites have been
selected, instruments and facilities would match the eight (8) installations that already exist to ensure consistency
(fiberglass flumes, ISCO sampler, data loggers, radio telemetry, etc.). Changes in stream flow, sediment, and
nutrient loads could be evaluated.
2.5.1
Buy necessary instruments and supplies.
2.5.2
Install equipment and instruments.
2.6 Water Chemistry Analyses: Analyze a suite of chemistry parameters for the following waters: precipitation,
snowmelt, stream water, and shallow soil water fluxes.
2.6.1
Perform suite of chemistry analyses for water samples, in accordance with the MP and QAPP.
2.6.2
Calibrate and install turbidity probes for ten (10) steams on Sierra National Forest, High Sierra Ranger
District.
2.7 Field Sampling (Vegetation, Stream Invertebrates, and Algae): Provide data collection support for riparian and
upland vegetation, stream invertebrates, and algae. These are the primary biological parameters being measured by
KREW.
2.7.1
Perform annual vegetation sampling.
2.7.2
Establish new Joint Venture Agreement with (The Regents of the) University of California, University of
California Santa Barbara, for stream invertebrate sampling and identification and complete annual
sampling.
2.7.3
Establish new Interagency Agreement with the United States Geological Survey (USGS) for algae
sampling and identification and complete annual sampling.
2.8 Draft and Final Project Report
2.8.1
Prepare a draft project report that includes the results of the work listed above. The report shall include
the following narrative sections:
a.A brief introduction section including a statement of purpose, the scope of the project, and a
description of the approach and techniques used during the project.
b.
A list of the items previously submitted as outlined in the Table of Items for Review
c.Any additional information that is deemed appropriate by the Project Director.
2.8.2
Submit a copy of the draft project report to the Grant Manager for review and comment.
2.8.3
Prepare a final project report that addresses, to the extent feasible, comments made by the Grant Manager
on the draft project report. Submit one (1) reproducible master and one (1) copy of the final report to the
Grant Manager for review and acceptance.
13
6.2. Constituents to be monitored and measurement techniques.
Temperature, conductivity, and pH are measured in water samples with an Oakton hand meter in the field.
Turbidity is measured continuously in the streams with the Forest Technology Systems DTS-12 sensor.
Ammonia (N), calcium, magnesium, nitrate (N), ortho-phosphate (P), potassium, sodium, sulfate, chloride, and acid
neutralizing capacity are measured in the laboratory using a continuous flow analyzer or an ion exchange chromatograph.
Invertebrates are collected with a D-frame kick-net (see Appendix A) and algae is collected by scraping rocks in designated
stream reaches (see Appendix B; http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/protocols/OFR02-150/index.html).
Vegetation sampling is done in the field using quadrat, line intercept, and box-plot techniques.
6.3 Project schedule
Table 2. (Element 6) Project schedule timeline (taken from Agreement No. 04-186-555-0)
Item
DESCRIPTION
DUE DATE
--
Personnel Services
1.0
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN and MONITORING PLAN
1.1
Quality Assurance Project Plan
8/05
1.2
Monitoring Plan
8/05
2.0
WORK TO BE PERFORMED BY GRANTEE
2.1
Project Assessment and Evaluation Plan (PAEP)
2.2.
Data Accessibility
2.2.1
Provide quality-assured data
10/1/06
2.2.2
User friendly website
10/1/05
2.2.3
Regular analysis and data summaries
2.3
Cumulative effects analysis and modeling of sediment and water quality
2.3.1
and
2.3.2
Report and review selection of models
2.3.3
Parameterize models for KREW watersheds.
EXHIBIT A – SCOPE OF WORK
8/05
10/1/05 and
every 6 months
10/1/05
10/1/06
th
2.4
Education and Community Outreach
4 quarter 2005
2.4.1
Meet with local organizations and identify collaborative efforts
2.4.2
Workshop to improve the use and usefulness of watershed information from
KREW
1st quarter 2006
2.4.3
Presentation to the California Bay-Delta Science Program/Panel
4th quarter 2006
2.5
Integrating Station
2.5.1
Buy instruments and supplies
4/1/05
2.5.2
Two operating stations
10/1/06
2.6
Water chemistry analyses
14
2nd quarter of
2005
Item
DESCRIPTION
DUE DATE
2.6.1
Annual report on water chemistry during pretreatment period
10/1/06
2.6.2
Water quality probes installed and operating
4/1/06
2.7
Field sampling
2.7.1
Annual report on vegetation sampling.
10/1/05
2.7.2
Annual report on invertebrate sampling
10/1/05
2.7.3
Annual report on algae sampling
10/1/05
2.8
Draft and Final Project Report
2.8.2
Draft Project Report
11/30/06
2.8.3
Final Project Report
2/28/07
EXHIBIT B – INVOICING, BUDGET DETAIL AND REPORTING PROVISIONS
5.0
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION FORM
th
(as needed)
6.1
Progress Reports by the twentieth (20 ) of the month following the end of
the calendar quarter (March, June, September, and December)
Quarterly
6.2
Expenditure/Invoice Projections
Quarterly
6.3
Grant Summary Form
6.4
Natural Resource Projects Inventory project survey form
#6
Copy of final CEQA/NEPA documentation
8/05
#22
Signed cover sheets for all permits
8/05
Day 90
Before final
invoice
EXHIBIT C – SWRCB GENERAL CONDITIONS
6.4 Geographical setting
KREW is located on the Sierra National Forest east of the town of Shaver Lake, California (Figure 2). Study sites are
located within the following latitude and longitude box: 37°05’00”, 119°13’00”; 37°05’00”,119°01’00”; 36°57’0”, 119°
01’00”; 36°57’0”, 119°13’00”. Access to the Providence Site is from Forest Service 10S17 (Providence Road) off of the
Dinkey Creek Road. Access to the Bull Site is from Forest Service 10S24 off of the McKinley Grove Road. The
experimental watersheds are located in mixed-conifer forest, between 5,000 and 8,000 feet elevation, on granite-based soils.
As such, these sites are typical of the southern Sierra Nevada and forested headwaters and provide a substantial quantity of
source water to the Bay-Delta ecosystem. The Providence Site typically experiences rain and snow events, while the Bull
Site is a snow-dominated location.
6.5 Constraints
During severe weather events, staff may not be able to access some locations because of safety concerns thus the interval
between samples could occasionally be different. Occasionally data could be lost due to instrument failure. Every effort is
made to ensure consistency for data collection; however, staff safety will always take priority.
15
Figure 2. Kings River Experimental Watershed project vicinity and watershed locations within the Sierra National Forest, California. The four watersheds outlined in red in the upper, lefthand corner of the map are the Providence Site; those in the lower, right-hand corner are the Bull Site.
.
7. QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA FOR MEASUREMENT DATA
Data Quality Objectives
Measurement or Analyses Type
Applicable Data Quality Objective
Field testing, pH by Oakton meter
Accuracy, Precision, Completeness
Field testing, conductivity by Oakton meter
Accuracy, Precision, Completeness
Field testing, temperature by Oakton meter
Accuracy, Precision, Completeness
Field testing, turbidity by Forest Technology
Systems DTS-12 sensor.
Accuracy, Precision, Completeness
Laboratory analyses, conventional constituents
in water
Accuracy, Precision, Recovery, Completeness
Accuracy will be determined by measuring one or more selected from performance testing samples or standard solutions
from sources other than those used for calibration.
Precision measurements will be determined on both field and laboratory replicates. The number of replicates for field
measurements will be three.
Recovery measurements will be determined by laboratory spiking of a replicate sample with a known concentration of the
analyte. The target level of addition is at least twice the original sample concentration.
Completeness is the number of analyses generating useable data for each analysis divided by the number of samples
collected for that analysis.
Method sensitivity is dealt with by the inclusion of the required SWAMP Target Reporting Limits, where such values exist,
and by the application of the definition of a Minimum Level as provided by the Inland Surface Water and Enclosed Bays
and Estuaries Policy. No Target Reporting Limits are set for the field analyses.
17
Field and Laboratory Measurements Data Quality Objectives Tables
Table 3. (Element 7) Data quality objectives for field measurements.
Parameter
Accuracy
Precision
Recovery
Target
Reporting Limit
Temperature
Conductivity
pH
Turbidity
± 0.5 °C
± 0.5 %
± 0.5 units
± 10% or 0.1 whichever
is greater
± 5% or 0.5*
± 5%*
± 5% or 0.5*
± 10% or 0.1*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
90%*
90%*
90%*
90%*
NA
NA
100%
Benthic
≤ 5% difference
≤ 5% difference
invertebrates
*No SWAMP requirement, suggested value is listed.
Completeness
Table 4. (Element 7) Data quality objectives for laboratory measurements.
Parameter
Accuracy
Precision
Recovery
Conventional
constituents in
water
Standard Reference
Materials (SRM,
CRM, PT) within
95% CI stated by
provider of material.
Laboratory
duplicate, blind field
duplicate, or
MS/MSD 25% RPD
Laboratory duplicate
minimum.
Same as above
Matrix spike 80%
to 120% or control
limits at ± 3
standard deviations
based on actual lab
data
Same as above
Ammonia (as N)
Same as above
Target
Reporting
Limits
Completeness
No SWAMP
requirement
suggest 90%
0.1 mg/L
0.05 mg/L
90%
90%
Calcium
Magnesium
Nitrate (as N)
Ortho-Phosphate
(as P)
Potassium
Sodium
Sulfate
Chloride
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
0.02 mg/L
0.01 mg/L
0.01 mg/L
90%
90%
90%
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
0.1 mg/L
0.1 mg/L
1.0 mg/L
0.25 mg/L
90%
90%
90%
90%
Acid Neutralizing
Capacity
Same as above
Same as above
Same as above
To be
determined
90%
18
8. SPECIAL TRAINING NEEDS/CERTIFICATION
8.1 Specialized training or certifications.
All Riverside laboratory personnel receive laboratory safety training and training on instruments by in-house staff.
Field staff based in Fresno are trained by the Project Manager or Field Supervisor according to written protocols and/or
instrument instructions. All Fresno staff are given safety and first aid training based on their field and lab duties.
Staff that climb trees to install solar panels, drive snowmobiles and ATVs, and use chainsaws are provided Forest Service
training according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Health and Safety Code Handbook (FSH 6709.11)
At least one staff person is trained by Campbell Scientific for programming and use of their CR10X data loggers.
8.2 Training and certification documentation.
Field and laboratory safety training is documented on Job Hazard Analysis forms according to Forest Service requirements
and in personnel files.
8.3 Training personnel.
Field staff based in Fresno are trained by the Project Manager or Field Supervisor according to written protocols and/or
instrument instructions. Safety training is by the Field Supervisor or a designated Forest Service employee for specialized
tasks like tree climbing, and use of snowmobiles and ATVs. First aid training is by a certified contractor.
Training is conducted by laboratory supervisors at Riverside for chemistry staff.
Chet Richmond is the Pacific Southwest Research Station’s safety officer and is located in Albany, California. The Sierra
Nevada Research Center has a safety committee.
19
9. DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS
Currently the life of the Forest Service’s Kings River Experimental Watershed research project is planned to extend through
2015. If funding and leadership are available, it could continue longer. The current State funded project is for a two-year
period of the longer research project.
Table 5. (Element 9) Document and record retention, archival, and disposition information.
Identify Type Needed
Retention
Archival
Disposition
Sample
Collection
and Field
Records
Hardcopy and
electronic
Life of the project*
Life of the project
Hardcopy discarded at end
of project, electronic
database maintained by
PSW
Chain of
custody for
samples
Hardcopy and
electronic
Life of project
Life of project
Discarded at end of project
Analytical
Records
Electronic and
hardcopy
Life of the project
Hardcopy for 10
years at Riverside
Hardcopy discarded after
10 years, database
maintained by PSW
Data
Records
Electronic—raw,
quality assured, and
analyses
Life of project
Life of project
Quality assured database
maintained by PSW
Raw data maintained for
life of project
Analyses maintained in
publications
Modeling
Reports
Hardcopy and
electronic
Life of project
Life of project
Life of project and in
publications
*’project’ refers to the life of the Kings River Experimental Watershed, at least through 2015.
The SNRC of PSW is the organization responsible for the documentation and maintenance of all records for the Kings
River Experimental Watershed project. Dr. Carolyn Hunsaker, as the Project Manager, is the primary person responsible
for all records, but she is assisted by her staff and the staff at the Riverside Chemistry Laboratory. Dr. David Herbst and
Dr. Larry Brown are responsible for the data collection and identification records associated with the invertebrate and algae
sample collection, respectively; they provide these records to Dr. Hunsaker. The Fresno office is the primary data
repository for the life of this research project.
The KREW data manager (to be hired) maintains the electronic database and ensures data backups take place. Data are
placed on the Fresno office server. Tape backups are run on this server every evening, and full backups are performed
every week. Individual personal computers are backed up every month to an external hard drive; the current month and
previous month backups are maintained. Annual photographs and data entry forms are copied to duplicate CDs at the end
of a water year (usually November/December). Backup hardcopies are made of all handwritten field data sheets and field
note books. Backup hardcopies and CDs are maintained in a different room from the originals. For QA/QC, all data that
are taken by hand in the field and entered into the computer are checked by a different person than the one that entered the
data. Selected data that have passed through a QA/QC process will be placed on the Forest Service’s web harvester,
HydroDB, for public access.
20
Samples sent to the Riverside Laboratory will include a chain of custody form (see Appendix A). The Riverside
Laboratory generates records for sample receipt and storage, analyses, and reporting.
Copies of this QAPP will be distributed to all parties involved with the project, including field staff, contractors, and
Riverside laboratory staff. As necessary, this QAPP will be updated and distributed by Jessica Auman via postal mailings
of CD copies. All originals of the first and subsequent amended QAPPs will be held at PSW Fresno.
21
GROUP B: DATA GENERATION AND ACQUISITION
10. SAMPLING PROCESS DESIGN
KREW consists of eight headwater watersheds with four watersheds at each of two sites (see Figure 1) and two integrating
stations that are each downstream of three of the research watersheds. These research watersheds were selected based on
their similar landscape characteristics, adjacency, land ownership, and suitability for the mechanical thinning and
prescribed fire treatments. Data will be collected before and after the management treatments on six watersheds; each set
of three treatment watersheds has a control watershed where no treatments occur during the research project. Thus KREW
has a BACI design—before and after with a control (Smith 2002, Stewart-Oaten et al. 1986). Thus there are 10
stream/watershed locations where several types of data are collected; State funds support the collection of water chemistry
and turbidity data. A 100-m long reach was selected upstream of the flumes or weirs at the first location with the “lowest”
stream gradient. This reach is used for annual stream benthic invertebrate and algae (every two years) sampling.
An evenly spaced grid was placed over all eight watersheds for a systematic sampling of upland watershed data. This grid
is 150 meters between points except for the two smallest watersheds where it is 75 meters between points in the north-south
direction to ensure that there are at least 50 points in all watersheds. These locations are permanently marked in the field
with a post and a unique code on stainless steel tags. Locations were identified using a Trimble GPS, laser rangefinder, and
compass; accuracy is 1 to 3 meters. Upland measurements are co-located at these 477 points or a random subset of them
(proportional to watershed size). Nutrient fluxes in forest throughfall and shallow mineral soil are measured annually at all
points using resin lysimeters. Vegetation is measured annually at 114 upland and 56 riparian locations. Vegetation
includes herbs, shrubs, and trees measured using 1-m quadrat, box plot, and line intercept methods. At the Providence Site,
the annual resin lysimeter data is supplemented with Prenart continuous vacuum lysimeters at four locations (one in each
watershed). Seven snowmelt collectors are co-located at the Prenart locations, and two snowmelts are located at three of
the meteorology instrument clusters (M10, M15, M20).
The Kings River Experimental Watershed (KREW) was designed prior to receiving State of California funding which
supports a portion of this research project. Statistical design and analysis support is provided by three PSW statisticians.
More information, including maps, can be found in the KREW Monitoring Plan, Research Study Plan, and at
www.fs.fed.us/psw/programs/snrc/water/kingsriver.
Smith, E.P. 2002. BACI design, pp. 141-148 In El-Shaarawi, A.H., and W.W. Piegorsch (eds.), Encyclopedia of
Environmetrics, Vol. 1, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester.
Stewart-Oaten, A., W.W. Murdoch, and K.R. Parker. 1986. Environmental impact assessment: pseudoreplication in time?
Ecology (67):929-940
22
11. SAMPLING METHODS
KREW has custom SOPs for water sample collection that conform to the intentions of the SWAMP SOPs (see Appendix
A). A SWAMP QAPP exists for stream benthic macroinvertebrate methods (see Appendix B). The U.S. Geological
Survey has standard methods for periphyton (see Appendix C).
All water samples are transported from the field in 125 ml Nalgene bottles, placed in insulated containers with blue ice
while in the field, and frozen within 10 hours of sample removal from the collection instrument. All sample collection
bottles have been rinsed in deionized water or nanopure water. Collection bottles vary depending on the instrument.
Prenart vacuum lysimeter: glass 1-liter bottles
Snowmelt: Nalgene HDPE 4-liter containers
ISCO: polypropylene 1-liter containers
Stream grab sample: Nalgene 125-ml bottles
All samples have a unique code, established by the Project Manager (see Table 6 and Appendix A), consisting of the
watershed code (P300, P301, P303, P304, D102, B200, B201, B203, B204, or T003), a location code if needed such as a
grid point, and a sample type.
Number of water samples collected per visit
 Stream grab or ISCO automatic sampler
10 locations in water year 2006 = 10 samples
 Prenart vacuum lysimeters at Providence Site
4 locations each with 12 sampling tips = 48 samples
 Snowmelts
--at Providence Site
4 locations at Prenarts each with 7 collectors = 28 samples
2 meteorology stations each with 2 collectors = 4 samples
--at Bull Site
1 meteorology station at lower Bull with 2 collectors = 2 samples
Total samples during wet season per visit = 92
Total samples during dry season per visit = 10
Sample visit frequency
Stream dry season--once a month
wet season--every 2 weeks
spring runoff--2 samples per stream every week (for 1-2 months)
storms—4 samples per stream per rain event (~ 4 storms/year)
Snowmelts every 2 weeks in wet season
Prenarts every 2 weeks in wet season
Wet season varies
long season: October through June = 9 months
short season: December through May = 6 months
Samples per visit during wet season = 92
9 months at 2 visits/month = 1,656 samples
6 months at 2 visits/month = 1,104 samples
spring runoff = 120 samples
storms = 160 samples
Samples per visit during dry season = 10
3 months = 30 samples
6 months = 60 samples
Field procedure
Sample bottle size is 125 ml.
23
Use only bottles that are known to be clean and rinsed with deionized water (3 rinses are recommended).
If adequate water is available, rinse the sample bottle with the collection water (stream, snowmelt, Prenart, cup tension
lysimeter) several times (3 rinses are recommended).
All collection bottles are emptied when a location is completed.
Note: The Riverside chemistry lab can perform analyses on as little as 20 ml.
Stream water
For a grab sample, take the sample from flowing water that has not been disturbed by bottle rinsing. Collect the water
sample and then place the Oakton meter probe in the stream water. Make sure the meter has stabilized before recording the
pH, electrical conductivity, and temperature measurements. The Oakton meters are calibrated following manufacturer’s
instructions (before each sampling trip).
For samples from the ISCO automatic sampler, a subset of all samples is taken for chemistry analyses based on the stream
hydrograph and a written protocol.
For Prenarts, snowmelts, and cup tension lysimeters, either pump the sample into a clean flask or disconnect the collection
bottle from the sampling line. Fill the 125 ml sample bottle. Use the remaining water to take pH, EC, and temperature
measurements with the Oakton meter and then discard the extra water.
Resin lysimeters
Resin lysimeters are collected and installed once each year between June 1 and September 30. The SOP is included in
Appendix A.
477 locations each with 2 soil lysimeters and 1 above-ground throughfall lysimeter = 1,431 total
Table 6. (Element 11) Watershed and instrument cluster codes and names.
Primary Code
Name
Description
P
P301
P303
P304
D102
P300
B
B201
B203
B204
T003
B200
M10
M15
M20
M25
Providence Site
Providence 301
Providence 303
Providence 304
Duff 102
Providence Integrating
Bull Site
Bull 201
Bull 203
Bull 204
Teakettle 003
Bull Integrating
Lower Providence (MPL)
Upper Providence (MPU)
Lower Bull (MBL)
Upper Bull (MBU)
Site with four watersheds
Watershed
Watershed
Watershed
Watershed
Integrating watershed
Site with four watersheds
Watershed
Watershed
Watershed
Watershed, historic weir
Integrating watershed
Meteorology instrument cluster
Meteorology instrument cluster
Meteorology instrument cluster
Meteorology instrument cluster
KREW custom SOPs specific to each field instrument/collection are contained in Appendix A.
24
12. SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY

In the field, all water samples are packed in wet ice or frozen ice packs during transport from the field to the
Fresno laboratory, so that they are kept at approximately 4˚C. Samples are stored in the PSW laboratory freezer at
-20oC for no more than 30 days before shipping. The temperature of the freezer is monitored by a NIST certified
traceable thermometer. Samples are shipped on ice in insulated containers. All caps and lids are checked for
tightness prior to shipping.

The Riverside Laboratory follows sample custody procedures outlined in their QA plan.

Any remaining sample after initial analysis is refrozen and retained at the Riverside Laboratory for one year. All
sample bottles are cleaned at the laboratory and returned to the Fresno office for reuse. It is the responsibility of
the personnel of each analytical laboratory to ensure that all applicable regulations are followed in the disposal of
samples or related chemicals.

Chain-of-custody procedures require that possession of samples be traceable from the time the samples are
collected until completion and submittal of analytical results. A complete chain-of-custody form is to accompany
the transfer of samples to the analyzing laboratory (see Appendix A). A sample is considered under custody if: it
is in actual possession; it is in view after in physical possession; it is placed in a secure area (accessible by or
under the scrutiny of authorized personnel only after in possession).

Field staff keeps a field log for each sampling event in a Rite-In-Rain notebook. The following items are recorded
in the field log for each sampling event:
1. time and date of sample collection;
2. sample ID numbers, including unique IDs for any replicate or blank samples; results of any field
measurements (temperature, pH, conductivity) and the time that measurements were made;
3. qualitative descriptions of relevant water conditions (e.g. color, flow level, clarity) or weather (e.g. wind, rain)
at the time of sample collection;
4. a description of any unusual occurrences associated with the sampling event, particularly those that may affect
sample or data quality;
5. the initials of sampling technician(s);
6. results of pH and conductivity probe calibrations as well as independent standard check values.

The field crews shall have custody of samples during field sampling. Chain of custody forms accompany all
samples during shipment to laboratories. Fresno staff will start the chain of custody which includes the watershed
code ID, the date collected, the date shipped to the laboratory, the date received, the date analyzed, the date the
laboratory approved the analyses, and the date the sample is discarded. The water quality database maintained by
the Fresno staff serves as the chain of custody record.

Laboratory Custody Log: Laboratories shall maintain custody logs sufficient to track each sample submitted and
to analyze or preserve each sample within specified holding times.
25
13. Analytical Methods
Table 7. (Element 13) Field analytical methods.
Analyte
Laboratory /
Organization
Project Action
Limit (units, wet
or dry weight)
Project
Quantitation Limit
(units, wet or dry
weight)
Analytical Method
Achievable Laboratory Limits
Analytical
Method/ SOP
Modified for
Method yes/no
MDLs (1)
Method (1)
pH
Field
monitoring by
PSW staff
5 – 9 pH units
NA
Oakton meter
None
NA
NA
Conductivity
Same
200µS
2.5µS
Oakton meter
None
NA
2.5µS
Temperature
Same
None
0oC
Oakton meter
None
NA
0oC
Turbidity
Same
1700 NTU
2 NTU
DTS 12 Digital
Turbidity
Sensor
None
2 NTU
2 NTU
(*) Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th edition.
Table 8. (Element 13) Laboratory analytical methods.
Analyte
Ammonia
(as N)
Acid
Neutralizing
Capacity
(ANC)
Calcium
Storage
Method
and
Holding
Time
Minimum
Volume
Needed
(mL)
Project
Action
Limit*
(units, wet
or dry
weight)
Project
Quantitation
Limit (units,
wet or dry
weight)
Frozen,
30 days
50 mL
5 mg/L
0.1 mg/L
EPA
350.1
No
0.05mg/L
0.1 mg/L
RCL
Frozen,
120 days
50 mL
200 mg/L
CaCO3
1mg/L
EPA
310.2
No
0.05mg/L
1mg/L
RCL
Frozen,
120 days
50 mL
60 mg/L
0.05 mg/L
EPA
300.1
Yes,
modified
for cations
0.05mg/L
0.05 mg/L
Frozen,
120 days
100 mg/L
0.25 mg/L
EPA
300.1
No
RCL
0.05mg/L
0.25 mg/L
RCL
Frozen,
120 days
EPA
300.1
Yes,
modified
for cations
0.05mg/L
0.02 mg/L
No
0.05mg/L
0.01 mg/L
No
Yes,
modified
for cations
Yes,
modified
for cations
0.05mg/L
0.01 mg/L
0.05mg/L
0.1 mg/L
0.05mg/L
0.1 mg/L
No
0.05mg/L
1.0 mg/L
Laboratory /
Organization
Riverside
Chemistry
Lab (RCL)
Chloride
Magnesium
Nitrate (as N)
Phosphate (as
Total P)
RCL
Potassium
RCL
Frozen,
120 days
Frozen,
120 days
Frozen,
120 days
Sodium
RCL
RCL
RCL
Sulfate
50 mL
50 mL
15 mg/L
0.02 mg/L
50 mL
10 mg/L
as N
0.01 mg/L
Analytical Method
Analytical
Method/
SOP
50 mL
1mg/L
0.01 mg/L
50 mL
110 mg/L
0.1 mg/L
EPA
300.1
EPA
365.1
EPA
300.1
Frozen,
120 days
50 mL
5 mg/L
0.1 mg/L
EPA
300.1
Frozen,
120 days
50 mL
3 mg/L
1.0 mg/L
EPA
300.1
Modified
for Method
yes/no
Achievable Laboratory Limits
MDLs (1)
Method (1)
*PAL’s as of October 2004 are based on preliminary data
Methods need revised minimum detection limit (MDL) calculations; the existing MDL’s are several years old.
EPA 350.1 automated colorimetric, EPA 365.1 automated colorimetric, EPA 310.2 automated colorimetric,
EPA 3001. Ion chromatograph (note standard method for cations requires either atomic analyzer or inductive coupled plasma argon
analyzer—neither are available at the RFL.)
26
14. Quality Control
Table 9. (Element 14) Field Testing and Sampling QC.
Matrix: water
Analytical Parameter(s):
Conventional Constituents
Analytical Method/SOP Reference:
Field Sampling
QC Type
Information Provided
Frequency
Acceptance
Limits
BLANKS
Field Equipment Blank
Contamination in sampling equipment
2 times per sampling
season
5%
Non-detect
5%
Non-detect
Field Blank
Bottle Blank
CALIBRATION CHECKS
Field Equipment Calibration
Transport, storage, and field handling
contamination
Contamination of sampling containers
Every sampling trip
Standard Reference Sample
Calibration drift and memory effect of
field instruments
Field Instrument Accuracy
REPLICATES
Field Duplicate
Precision of all steps after acquisition
5%
Every sampling trip
Non-detect
+/-10%
Conductivity
or +/- 0.5pH units
+/- 10%
Bottle blank is deionized water in bottle at time of shipment.
Field blank is deionized water in bottle taken to field, left for 2 weeks, brought back for shipment.
Field duplicate requires taking an additional sample at a station.
Field equipment blank is deionized water passed through sampling equipment and collected as a normal sample. Field
equipment blanks are collected at the beginning and the end of the sampling season.
Standard reference sample is either an independent pH 7 buffer or 46.7µS.
27
Table 10. (Element 14) Laboratory Analytical QC.
Matrix: water
Analytical Parameter(s):
Conventional Constituents
Analytical Method/SOP Reference:
Continuous flow analyzer and ion
chromatograph
QC Type
Information Provided
Frequency
Acceptance
Limits
BLANKS
Reagent blank
Analytical Instrument Blank
Contaminated reagent
Contamination of analytical instrument
5%
5%
Non-detect
Non-detect
SPIKES
Analysis matrix spike
CALIBRATION CHECK
SAMPLES
Span check
Standard Reference Sample
Instrument bias
5%
80-120%
Recovery
Calibration drift and memory effect
Instrument Accuracy
Every batch of samples
5%
+/- 10%
+/- 10%
REPLICATES & SPLITS
Laboratory splits
Inter-laboratory precision
+/- 10%
Analysis replicates
Instrument precision
5%
Beginning and end of
every sample batch
28
+/- 10%
15. INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING, INSPECTION, AND MAINTENANCE
Field measurement equipment will be checked for operation in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. This includes battery
checks, routine replacement of membranes, and cleaning of conductivity electrodes. All equipment will be inspected when first handed
out and when returned from use for damage.
The Pacific Southwest Research Station at Fresno and Riverside maintains its equipment in accordance with its SOPs, which include
those specified by the manufacturer and those specified by the method.
Table 11. (Element 15) Testing, inspection, maintenance of sampling equipment and analytical instruments.
Equipment /
Instrument
Maintenance
Activity, Testing
Activity or Inspection
Activity
Responsible
Person
Oakton pH/EC
meter
Calibration
ISCO samplers
Frequency
SOP Reference
Jessica Auman,
Fresno
Every sampling trip
Appendix A, item 4
Field check*
Tom Whitaker,
Fresno
Every 2 weeks
Appendix A, item 7
Turbidity
probes
Office check
Field check*
Tom Whitaker,
Fresno
Every week via telemetry
Every 2 weeks
Appendix A, item 7
Prenart vacuum
lysimeters
Field Check *
Every 2 weeks
Appendix A, item 6
Continuous
flow analyzer
Ion Exchange
Chromatograph
See below
Jessica Auman,
Fresno
Riverside
chemistry lab
See below
See Appendix D
See below
Riverside
chemistry lab
See below
See Appendix D
Riverside chemistry laboratory instruments are the continuous flow analyzer and ion exchange chromatograph.
Instruments are inspected for physical damage weekly by lab personnel.
Calibration, instrument drift, and reproducibility are evaluated with each run by lab personnel.
Instruments are not currently on a maintenance contract. Repairs are made in house when possible and by manufacturer
technicians when necessary.
*Field checks are conducted by field staff and involve in-field repair work and maintenance specific to each piece of
equipment. Damage to equipment that is irreparable in the field is brought to PSW and either repaired onsite or returned to
the manufacturer for repairs.
29
16. INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY
Table 12. (Element 16) Testing, inspection, maintenance of sampling equipment and analytical instruments.
Equipment /
Instrument
SOP
reference
Calibration Description
and Criteria
Frequency of
Calibration
Responsible Person
Oakton pH/EC
meter
Appendix A,
item 4
Calibration of pH probe is
conducted using a 3 point
calibration curve and followed
by an independent pH 7 check.
If the check standard is greater
than +/- 0.5 units off, the probe
is recalibrated. Calibration of
the conductivity probe is
conducted using a 46.7µS
standard followed by an
independent check standard and
is recalibrated if value differs
more than 5% from certified
value.
Weekly, or every
field sampling trip
Jessica Auman, Fresno
DTS 12 Digital
Turbidity
Sensor
Appendix A,
item 7 (still
improving)
Calibration is conducted
annually by FTS Inc. per
manufacturer’s
specifications.
Annual
Tom Whitaker, Fresno
Continuous
flow analyzer
Appendix D
Calibration is integrated
into the quality control
protocols and conducted
with each run
Every sample set
Dave Jones, Riverside
Ion exchange
chromatograph
Appendix D
Every sample set
Dave Jones, Riverside
PSW Sample
Storage Freezer
Appendix A,
item 6
Calibration is integrated
into the quality control
protocols and conducted
with each run
NIST Certified Traceable
Thermometer reading of
-20 oC +/- 5oC
Weekly Check
Jessica Auman, Fresno
30
17. INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE OF SUPPLIES AND CONSUMABLES
Table 13. (Element 17) Inspection/acceptance testing requirements for consumables and supplies.
Project-Related
Supplies /
Consumables
Inspection / Testing
Specifications
Acceptance
Criteria
Frequency
Responsible
Individual
pH Buffers
Manufacturer
certificate of
accuracy and
precision
Manufacturer
certificate of
accuracy and
precision
Every 6 months
Jessica Auman
Conductivity
Standards
Manufacturer
certificate of
accuracy and
precision
Manufacturer
certificate of
accuracy and
precision
Every 6 months
Jessica Auman
125 mL Nalgene
Bottles
Inspected upon
arrival by lab
personnel
Clean
When need
replaced
Jessica Auman
Analytical
Chemicals
Manufacturer
certificate of purity,
accuracy, and
precision
Manufacturer
certificate of purity,
accuracy, and
precision
Monthly
Dave Jones
31
18. NON-DIRECT MEASUREMENTS (EXISTING DATA)
Dr. Hunsaker performs an ongoing literature search to locate published research and monitoring data relevant to this
project. Such literature is important to place the findings of this research project in perspective with similar research
in the Sierra Nevada of California and headwater ecosystems of arid mountain regions with granite soils. Quality is a
function of peer-reviewed, published literature.
KREW began baseline (pre-treatment) data collection starting 1 October 2001 (water year 2002). The data collected
with this project will be compared to the early years of KREW. The entire KREW database is maintained as stated in
this document, and data will be reviewed against the data quality objectives stated in section 7.
32
19. DATA MANAGEMENT
Field data are collected and recorded in three ways: automatically by electronic instruments with data loggers, written in
field notebooks (Rite-In-Rain), or written on custom forms. Electronic data are downloaded to office or laptop computers
and then moved to the office server (see section 9). Notebooks and forms are copied daily or weekly, and the originals are
kept in a different location from the copies.
ACCESS and EXCEL are the primary data storage software. Data from field notebooks and custom forms are entered into
either ACCESS databases or EXCEL spreadsheets. All data are double checked by a staff person that is different from the
person that entered the data. Final datasets are placed on the office server. See section 9 for additional detail.
Personal computers at the Riverside Laboratory are backed up to external hard drives. While the office server is the
primary data repository, personal computers at the Fresno Office are backed up monthly to an external hard drive. At the
end of a water year many datasets are also written to backups on CDs.
Dr. Hunsaker maintains a binder with annual forms for tracking database status (see example in Appendix A).
33
GROUP C: ASSESSMENT AND OVERSIGHT
20. ASSESSMENTS & RESPONSE ACTIONS
KREW staff holds project meetings every two weeks for planning work assignments and solving problems; topics include
equipment malfunction and repair, data QA/QC and processing, training of staff for new tasks, and safety. Written
protocols or SOPs are in place for all primary tasks. New staff are trained by an experienced person; it is the responsibility
of their supervisor or the Project Manager to periodically check on each person’s proficiency. For example, seasonal staff
are trained to perform a task and an experienced person should be working with them for one day each week to be sure they
are following the SOP.
The chemistry laboratory supervisory scientist (currently Pamela Padgett) is responsible for oversight on the chemistry staff
at Riverside. The Fresno chemist (currently Jessica Auman) will visit the Riverside Laboratory twice a year to review
methods and practices and discuss data results. Dr. Herbst is responsible for oversight on the invertebrate taxonomy work
at the Sierra Nevada Aquatics Laboratory (see QAPP, Appendix B). Dr. Brown is responsible for the work performed by
U.S. Geological Survey staff and their contractor (see Appendix C).
If an audit discovers any discrepancy, the appropriate supervisor of QA Officer will discuss the observed discrepancy with
the appropriate person responsible for the activity (see organization chart). The discussion will begin with whether the
information collected is accurate, what were the cause(s) leading to the deviation, how the deviation might impact data
quality, and what corrective actions might be considered.
Overall project reviews are made by the PSW QA Officer and may include the SWRCB QA Officer. The PSW QA Officer
has the power to halt all sampling and analytical work by PSW if the deviation(s) noted are considered detrimental to data
quality.
34
21. REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT
See also Section 6.
Table 14. (Element 21) QA management reports.
Item
Description
2.6.1
Annual report on water chemistry during pretreatment period
10/1/06
2.6.2
Water quality probes installed and operating
4/1/06
2.7
Field sampling
2.7.1
Annual report on vegetation sampling.
10/1/05
2.7.2
Annual report on invertebrate sampling
10/1/05
2.7.3
Annual report on algae sampling
10/1/05
2.8
Draft and Final Project Report
2.8.2
Draft Project Report
2.8.3
Final Project Report
6.1
Due Date
11/30/06
2/28/07
th
Progress reports by the twentieth (20 ) of the month following the end of
the calendar quarter (March, June, September, and December)
Report preparer: Dr. Carolyn Hunsaker
Report recipient: Mr. Anthony Toto
35
Quarterly
GROUP D: DATA VALIDATION AND USABILITY
22. DATA REVIEW, VERIFICATION, AND VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS
Data generated by project activities will be reviewed against the data quality objectives cited in Element 7 and the quality
assurance/quality control practices cited in Elements 14, 15, 16, and 17. Data will be separated into three categories: (1)
data meeting all data quality objectives, (2) data failing precision or recovery criteria, and (3) data failing to meet accuracy
criteria. Data meeting all data quality objectives, but with failures of quality assurance/quality control practices will be set
aside until the impact of the failure on data quality is determined. Once determined, the data will be moved into either the
first category or the last category.
Data falling in the first category is considered usable by the project.
Data falling in the last category is considered not usable.
Data falling in the second category will have all aspects assessed. If sufficient evidence is found supporting data quality for
use in this project, the data will be moved to the first category, but will be flagged with a KREW code that provides a
descriptive note in the metadata or a “J” as per EPA specifications. KREW staff are in the process of developing data
quality codes.
36
23. VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION METHODS
It is the Project Manager’s responsibility, with assistance from the KREW staff person assigned to be a lead on each dataset, to verify and
validate data as complete and final. This final step is necessary before data will be released to collaborators and/or the public. All data
records will be checked visually and recorded as checked by initials and dates. Dr. Hunsaker maintains a binder with annual forms
for tracking database status (see example in Appendix A).
Issues will be noted. Reconciliation and correction will be determined by the lead staff person for that type of data, Dr. Hunsaker, and
the PSW QA Officer.
37
24. RECONCILIATION WITH USER REQUIREMENTS
This research project was designed with the help of a statistician to ensure that it can answer the questions posed by the
larger Kings River Experimental Watershed (KREW). The data are collected continuously by electronic instruments or on
a set schedule. Some data will be lost occasionally because of instrument failure or limited assess to sites because of
weather; however, these missing data are not expected to limit most uses. Persons wishing to use these data for purposes
different from the original design would be responsible for evaluating the suitability of the data based on the metadata
information.
The current SWRCB project is funding two years of data collection for a research project that is planned to continue
through 2015. Data trends and forest management effects will not be able to be answered with just these two years of data;
they will have to be combined with other years to achieve the KREW objectives.
38
Appendix A:
KREW Forms and Custom Standard Operating Procedures
Items
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Label protocol for samples
Chain of custody
Database status by year
Oakton meter calibration
Prenart site sampling procedure
Calibration and maintenance procedure of traceable freezer thermometer
Flow Site Sampling Procedure (includes turbidity probes)
39
Item 1.
Kings River Experimental Watershed: Codes for water and resin chemistry samples
Sample
Type
Stream
Prenart
Resin at
Prenart
Resin at
Grid
Throughfall
at Prenart
Throughfall
at Grid
Snowmelt at
Prenart
Invertebrate
Sample
Type
Code
Watershed
Code
Location
Code
S
I
P
3
0
1
S
P
P
R
G
D
P
D
P
1
3
1
3
0
0
0
0
2
1
2
1
5
8
5
P
3
0
1
A
P
3
0
1
5
P
3
0
1
A
1
P
R
T
P
T
M
P
P
3
0
1
I
G
P
3
0
1
P
3
0
1
2
P
3
0
1
4
Cup
Lysimeter
L
Critical
Loads
Snowmelt
M
P
CL
1
2
1
2
Example Description
Stream ISCO water sample,
Providence 301
Stream grab water sample, Duff 102
Prenart water sample, Providence 301, bottle 5
Prenart water sample, Duff 102, bottle 8
Soil resin at Prenart, Providence 301
Positioned at the sampling tip for bottle 5
Resin at grid location A12,
Providence 301
Throughfall resin at Prenart, Providence 301
Positioned at the sampling tip for bottle 5
Throughfall resin at grid location A12,
Providence 301
Snowmelt water sample at Prenart,
Providence 301, collector 1
Invertebrate grab water sample,
Providence 301
Tension cup lysimeter water sample,
Providence 301, collector 2 (P301 is only
watershed, for critical loads project)
Snowmelt water sample at Prenart,
Providence 301, collector 4 for Critical Loads
Resin Lysimeters and Precipitation Collector Labels
A label for a soil resin lysimeter at a grid point should look like the following.
R-P301-A12
2003
R for soil resin, P301 for watershed code, A12 for grid point code
Year
A label for a throughfall (precipitation) resin at a grid point should look like the following.
T-P301-A12
2003
T for throughfall resin, P301 for watershed code, A12 for grid point code
Year
40
A label for a soil resin lysimeter and throughfall (precipitation) resin at a Prenart tip should have the
associated bottle code at the end. See table on following page for bottle codes.
RP-P301-5
2003
TP-P301-5
RP for soil resin at a Prenart, P301 for watershed code, 5 for Prenart
bottle 5 sampling tip (6 m on left of shed at 13 cm depth).
TP for throughfall (precipitation) resin collector at a Prenart.
PRENART LYSIMETER
Bottle layout, bottle number, and position color code
Tip
6m
depth left
4m
left
2m
left
Shed 2 m
right
4m
right
6m
right
Open
canopy
bottle
11
color
blue
bottle
12
color
red
13
throughfall only
13
cm
bottle 5 bottle 3
color
color
blue
green
bottle 1
color
white
bottle 7
color
white
bottle 9
color
green
26
cm
bottle 6 bottle 4
color
color
red
orange
bottle 2
color
silver
bottle 8
color
silver
bottle
10
color
orange
at snowmelt 7
A Prenart label on a water sample bottle should look like the following.
P-P301-5 Prenart at Providence 301, bottle 5 (6 m to left of shed, 13 cm depth, color blue)
01-08-03 Date taken from field (mm-dd-yy)
P-D102-8 Prenart at Duff 102, bottle 8 (2 m to right of shed, 26 cm depth, color silver)
02-30-03 Date taken from field (mm-dd-yy)
Snowmelt Collector Layout
1
collector
to the
far left
of shed
2
middle
collector
to left of
shed
3
Shed
collector
location
immediately
left of shed
4
collector
immediately
right of
shed
5
middle
collector
to left of
shed
A label for a snowmelt water collector should look like the following.
41
6
collector
to the
far left
of shed
7
Open
canopy
away
from
shed
MP-P301-1
Snowmelt at Providence 301, location 1 (collector to far left of shed)
01-08-03 Date taken from field (mm-dd-yy)
A label for an ISCO water sample should look like the following.
SI-P301
ISCO water sample taken from Providence 301
01-05-03 13:30
Date ISCO sampler took sample (mm-dd-yy) followed by the time ISCO
sampler took sample in 24 hours (hours:minutes)
01-08-03
Date taken from field (mm-dd-yy)
During a storm (flow doubles or flow above 50 l/s) one of three comments may be added to a bottle.
These should be written on the third line.
storm peak – sample was taken with 90 minutes of the peak
rising limb – sample taken between start of storm and 90 minutes prior to peak.
falling limb – sample taken more than 90 minutes after peak but hydrograph still declining
During spring melt with a clear diurnal pattern these comments are accepted.
daily high – within 90 minutes of the daily high
daily low – within 90 minutes of the daily low.
Getting both samples from the same day is ideal so if one of the two is only within 120 minutes that is
OK.
If you are not in either a storm or a spring snowmelt time then do not add these comments.
Example:
SI – D102
3/23/05 1531
storm peak
3/25/05
42
Item 2.
PSW Fresno KREW Project Chain of Custody
Sample Type
Site ID
Date Collected
Sampling
Technician
Sample Storage
Samples Relinquished by:_________________________________
Date:____________________________
Samples Received at PSW by:_____________________________
Date:____________________________
Samples Shipped by:_____________________________________
Ship Method: ______FedEX on ice____________________
Date:____________________________
Samples Received at lab by:_______________________________
Receiving Laboratory:
USDA Riverside Fire Lab, Riverside, CA
Date:____________________________
43
Item 3.
Record of KREW Database Status by Year
Year: 2005
The staff person(s) responsible for inputting data from field data sheets and finalizing (i.e., second
check for quality control) should initial and date in the appropriate field when a task is completed.
Add comments as necessary for clarity.
Data type
2005
Initial / Date / Comments
Invertebrate
Input physical habitat data, backup copies filed
Final physical habitat data
Habitat: Supervisor check, put in archive
Input photos
Final photos
Photos: Supervisor check, put in archive
Resin lysimeters
Input Providence grid data
Final Providence grid data
Prov. grid: Supervisor check, put in archive
Input Bull grid data
Final Bull grid data
Bull grid: Supervisor check, put in archive
Input Prenart data
Final Prenart data
Prenart: Supervisor check, put in archive
Input Providence grid photos
Final Providence grid photos
P. photos: Supervisor check, put in archive
Input Bull grid photos
Final Bull grid photos
Bull photos: Supervisor check, put in archive
Vegetation
Input vegetation data, backup copies filed
Final vegetation data
Veg.: Supervisor check, put in archive
Fuels
Input fuel loading data, backup copies filed
Final fuel loading data
Fuels: Supervisor check, put in archive
Sediment (catchment basin)
Input sediment data, backup copies filed
Final sediment data (field & lab)
Sediment: Supervisor check, put in archive
44
Data type
2005
Initial, Date, Comments
Soils
Input soils field data, backup copies filed
Final soils field data
Field: Supervisor check, put in archive
Input soils lab data, backup copies filed
Final soils lab data
Lab: Supervisor check, put in archive
Shipping list for samples to lab
Data returned from lab
Geomorphology*
Input channel data, backup copies filed
Final channel data
Supervisor check, put in archive
Input channel reference photos
Final channel reference photos
Channel photos: Supervisor check, put in archive
Water chemistry
Input Prenart pH and EC, backup copies filed
Prenart: Supervisor check, put in archive
Snowmelt pH and EC, backup copies filed
Snowmelt: Supervisor check, put in archive
Stream pH and EC, backup copies filed
Stream: Supervisor check, put in archive
Tension lysimeter pH & EC, backup copies filed
Tension lysimeter: Supervisor check, put in archive
*Includes channel cross sections, V-star, woody debris, longitudinal profile, etc.—provide details as
needed for clarity.
45
Item 4.
Calibration and Maintenance Procedure of
Oakton pH and Conductivity Field Meter
7 February 2006
J. D. Auman
1) Purpose
a) Both pH and conductivity need to be calibrated every morning before any sampling trip to minimize drift and
maximize accuracy of field measurements.
b) Calibration checks are conducted throughout the field day to identify drift or contamination problems.
c) Temperature probe will be calibrated every six months against a NIST certified thermometer to maintain accuracy
of field temperature measurements.
2) Materials
Before heading out in the field make sure the following are in each Oakton kit:
Oakton meter and attached probe
pH buffer bottles labeled 4, 7, 10 no more than one month old
one additional bottle of pH 7 buffer labeled “pH 7 Check”
KimWipes
Deionized water bottle
2 bottles 46.7µS Conductivity standard (one labeled “46.7µS Check”)
Electrode storage solution
Extra batteries (takes four AAA’s)
Field notebook
Pencils or sharpies
3) Procedure
a) Turn on meter and remove red plastic cap from probe
b) Soak probe for 10 minutes in deionized (DI) water
c) Press “CAL/MEAS” for 3 seconds
d) Meter will prompt “RST” and “CAL” in display
e) Press “ENTER” (screen will flash some characters and then return to measurement mode)
f) Calibration
i) To calibrate Conductivity probe:
(1) Make sure meter is in conductivity mode by pressing “MODE” until the units of µS appear on right of
screen
(2) Rinse probe and sample cup in DI water followed by a small amount of 46.7µS conductivity standard
(3) Pour aliquot of conductivity standard into clean cup
(4) Dip probe into cup
(5) Wait for measured value to stabilize
(6) When “READY” indicator is on the screen and reading stabilizes, press “CAL/MEAS”
(7) Screen should show “CAL” to indicate it is in calibration mode
(8) Use ▲▼scroll keys to adjust reading to the correct value of the standard (46.7µS)
(9) When “READY” indicator appears again along with “CAL” press “ENTER”
(10) “CON” will flash once on the screen to indicate that the meter is calibrated at the current buffer (this is
the calibrated, temperature compensated conductivity value)
ii) To calibrate pH probe:
(1) Press “MODE” to select pH mode
(2) Rinse probe and cup in DI water followed by a small amount of pH 7 buffer (or whichever buffer you are
currently using)
(3) Dip probe into fresh cup of pH 7 buffer
(4) Wait for measured value to stabilize
(5) When “READY” indicator is on the screen and reading stabilizes, press “CAL/MEAS”
46
(6) Screen should show “CAL” to indicate it is in calibration mode
(7) Use ▲▼scroll keys to identify correct standard being measured in bottom right of screen
(8) When “READY” indicator appears again along with “CAL” press “ENTER”
(9) “CON” will flash once on the screen to indicate that the meter is calibrated at the current buffer
(10) Rinse probe with DI and repeat above steps for pH 4 and pH 10 buffers
g) Calibration Checks
i) Switch to measure mode by pressing “CAL/MEAS” until “CAL” is no longer on the screen
ii) Switch to conductivity mode by pressing “MODE” until “µS” on the screen and rinse probe and cup with DI
followed by conductivity standard
iii) Pour fresh aliquot of 46.7 µS check standard in clean cup and insert rinsed probe
iv) Wait until measurement becomes stable and screen reads “READY”
v) Conductivity check value must be within +/-5% of the original 46.7 µS standard reading. If it is not, then
repeat both calibration and check standard steps again
vi) Record certified value of check standard used and the actual value measured by the Oakton in the field
notebook as follows:
“46.7 µS Check Std. reads 47.5µS”
as well as time, date, and your initials
vii) Rinse probe and cup with DI and small amount of pH 7 buffer and switch mode to pH
viii) Pour aliquot of pH 7 Check buffer into clean cup and insert probe
ix) Wait until measurement becomes stable and screen reads “READY”
x) pH 7 check value must be within +/-0.5 of 7.00. If it is not, then repeat both calibration and check standard
steps again
xi) Record certified value of check standard used and the actual value measured by the Oakton in the field
notebook as follows:
“pH 7 Check Std. reads 7.10”
as well as time, date, and your initials
xii) Rinse probe with DI and replace red cap filled with electrode storage solution
h) Probe Maintenance
i) Buffers and conductivity standards should be replaced monthly
ii) When replacing old buffers and standards:
(1) Rinse bottles 3 times with DI
(2) Rinse 3 times with 5-10mL of fresh solution being replaced
(3) Label with chemical, date, and initials of technician as follows:
pH 7 buffer
2/7/2006
JDA
iii) Check the probe at this time
iv) Can be cleaned in mild detergent bath followed by thorough rinsing in 3 separate aliquots of clean DI
v) Steel pins of conductivity probe can be cleaned using a cotton swab soaked in isopropyl alcohol
vi) KimWipes are the only tissue that can be used to dry the probe --using caution around the pH probe
(KimWipes are the only tissue that will not cause static build-up on probe)
vii) DO NOT DRY PROBE WITH ANYTHING OTHER THAN A KIMWIPE!!!
4) Troubleshooting
a) Unstable Readings
(a) Make sure probe is submerged in sufficient amount of sample
(b) Inspect probe for cracks or damage
(c) Recalibrate probe
(d) If the above do not work, use the second Oakton or the most stable meter available and note the
instability in the field notebook
1. Clean probe when you return to lab
2. Probe may need to be replaced if still unstable (probe life is 6-12 months)
b) Meter display reads “OR” on upper display
(a) A sensor is in out of range solution, shorted, or broken
47
1. Make sure probe is fully connected to meter
2. Inspect probe for damage
3. Check with pH 7 buffer or 46.7µS standard
4. Probably will need to replace probe
c) Meter display reads “OR” on lower display
(a) Temperature probe is in out of range solution, shorted, broken, or dirty
1. Make sure probe is fully connected to meter
2. Inspect probe for damage
3. Clean single metal pin with isopropyl alcohol upon return to lab
4. Probably will need to replace probe
d) While calibrating conductivity probe, a probe picture with ERR appears in bottom left corner of screen
(a) Conductivity standard is out of the +/- 20% range
1. Repeat reset and calibration steps in section 3 c-f
2. Replace conductivity standard with fresh standard
e) Other error message
(a) Err. 1 – hardware failed, need to replace meter
(b) Err. 2 – weak battery or hardware failure
(c) Err. 3 – A/D converter error
48
Item 5.
Prenart Site Sampling Procedure
7 February 2006
J. D. Auman
1) Purpose
a) Prenart vacuum lysimeter provides a continuous measurement of soil water chemistry at one location during the
period of the year when the shallow soil is wetted above 26cm. This provides information on the variability of
chemistry fluxes during the wet season
b) Snowmelt collectors provide an estimate of the variability in precipitation chemistry during the wet season.
2) Materials
Before heading out to the field, make sure to pack the following:
2 Oakton meters with supplies (see Oakton meter protocol)
Field notebook
Pencils or sharpies
Vacuum pump
Vacuum flask
Stopper with fittings for pump and snowmelt sample tube
Labels or tape
20 clean, prelabeled, 125ml sample containers per Prenart site +2 per met site
Large cooler with blue ice
Sorrel’s, snowshoes, or skis and ski boots/poles
Extra warm clothing
Lunch
Water
Shovel
Radio
Keys and codes for locks
Snowmobile helmet
Extra Prenart fuses
Sunglasses
Large Ziploc bags (2 per site)
Stove, pot, matches, and fuel
Copies of any pertinent protocols
Distilled water field blank bottles
Extra field duplicate bottles
3) Procedure
a) Prenarts
i) Upon arrival to a Prenart site record the site number, date, time, and initials of sampling technicians
ii) Make a table in the notebook with the following 5 columns:
(1) Bottle number (fill in column with 1-12)
(2) Sample volume
(3) EC
(4) pH
(5) Temperature
iii) Unlock Prenart shed
(1) Shed lock combinations are the same as the stream code for example, the Site P303 lock combination is
0303
iv) Remove the Prenart cover:
(1) The pressure gauge should read between -200 to -500 mbar
(2) If the system has pressure and appears to be working, shut it off
49
(3) Record the battery voltage from the solar controller in the field notebook
(4) Record the volume of water contained in the overflow bottle as:
OF= #mL
(5) Empty the overflow bottle
v) The blue case in the ground contains 12 glass bottles attached under vacuum to the Prenart system
(1) Open blue box
(2) Remove a bottle being careful not to kink tubing or snap tubing connector
(a) Note the bottle number (should be on both lid and bottle)
(b) Record the volume of water in table in notebook
(i) If bottle is completely full, record volume as 1300 ml in notebook
(c) Pour small amount of sample from glass bottle into125mL sample bottle labeled with site ID, time,
date, and initials using a Sharpie as follows:
i.
ii.
PP301-7
14:20
2/7/06
P301
*This label indicates
Prenart sample bottle number
7 at site
JDA
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
Cap bottle, shake, and discard
Repeat 2 more times (as long as sample volume permits)
Fill bottle no more than ¾ full to allow for expansion when frozen and place in large Ziploc
Remove red cap from Oakton probe
With remainder of sample in glass jar rinse Oakton sample cup and Oakton probe 3 times (or as
many times as sample volume permits)
(i) Fill cup with enough sample to sufficiently cover the probe
(j) When meter readings stabilize, record EC, pH, and temperature in field notebook table
(k) Empty any remaining sample from glass jar, tightly recap and return to blue box
(l) Repeat a-k with remaining 11 bottles
vi) When finished, turn machine on and make sure that it maintains a vacuum.
vii) Lock Prenart shed
b) Snowmelt
i) At each Prenart site, six snowmelts are located next to the shed and a seventh is in the nearest open canopy
location
ii) They are numbered (facing front of shed) as follows:
(a) #1 is the collector to the far left of the shed
(b) #2 is the middle collector to the left of the shed
(c) #3 is the collector immediately to the left of the shed
(d) #4 is the collector immediately to the right of the shed
(e) #5 is the middle collector to the right of the shed
(f) #6 is the collector to the far right of the shed
(g) #7 is the collector in the open canopy
(h) In addition, there are three meteorology stations with two snowmelts each
(i) They are labeled 1 and 2 on the fence post with 1 in closer proximity to the weather station than
2
iii) Create another table in the field notebook labeled “Snowmelt” containing the same five columns but only
seven bottles
iv) Each snowmelt has two tubes attached to a fence post
(1) One is labeled V and is the vent
(2) The other is labeled S and has white tape around the tip and is the sample tube
v) Attach sample tube to one side of the flask stopper with the other side attached to the pump.
vi) Make absolutely certain that, when pumping, no water will be drawn from the flask into the pump.
vii) Pump until about 200ml of water is drawn into the flask, note the exact volume
viii) Break vacuum by removing stopper
ix) Swirl water in flask trying to rinse as much surface area as possible
x) Pour the rinsate into a 125mL labeled bottle, cap and shake
(1) Sample labels should be of the form:
50
i.
ii.
iii.
*This label indicates
Snowmelt at Providence site 301
Sample bottle 2
MP301-2
14:00
2/6/06
JDA
xi) Transfer rinsate to Oakton sample cup and insert probe
xii) Replace stopper in flask and resume pumping until hose begins to sputter. This indicates that the snowmelt
collector is empty.
xiii) Record total sample volume from vii and xii in snowmelt table in notebook
xiv) Rinse sample bottle two more times with small aliquots of sample
xv) Pour sample into labeled bottle
xvi) Rinse Oakton probe and sample cup two more times if possible
xvii) Fill cup with enough sample to sufficiently cover the probe
xviii)
Record EC, pH, and temperature in field notebook table
xix) Repeat with remaining six bottles
c) Notes on Snowmelts
i) If while drawing sample flask reaches ¾ full, disconnect the pump, note the volume, do triplicate rinses of
sample bottle and Oakton, collect sample and perform measurements, then discard the rest of the water
ii) Finish pumping sample and record the total volume removed from collector
iii) QA/QC samples will be collected
d) Cup lysimeter (Site P301 only)
i) All water is drawn from each lysimeter every two weeks.
ii) The tubes are labeled with their number (1-10).
iii) Unlike snowmelts, cup lysimeters have only one tube.
iv) Unclip the tube and free the end of ice. It can be defrosted by the heat of your hand. Attach to the pump flask
and draw a -500mbar vacuum.
v) If water does not begin flowing into the flask, check the length of the tube for ice and try again. The collector
may be empty.
vi) After sample is collected (or no water is drawn),sustain the -500mbar of pressure, pinch tubing shut, and
replace the washer
vii) Remove the flask and stopper
viii) If possible, rinse sample bottle, Oakton probe, and sample cup
ix) If sample volume is more than 10 ml, put a sample in a bottle and label as indicated below:
L P301-10
14:15
01/24/05
CJ
x) Bring all sufficient samples back to the Fresno lab
4) QA/QC Sample Collection
a) Quality control samples will be collected at a frequency of 5%
b) The QA/QC Sampling Summary Table below lists the number of each type of QA/QC sample to be collected at
each site
Sample
Field Duplicates
Field Blanks
Type
Prenart
Snowmelt
per Trip
3
2
per Trip
3
2
51
Bottle Blanks
Every Month
3
2
i)
Field duplicates:
(1) Collect an additional sample bottle from collecting unit that contains a large enough volume to collect
two samples and make pH, EC, and temperature measurements
(2) Use identical sampling method (i.e. 3 bottle rinses, etc.)
(3) Collect three duplicate pairs (three additional samples) randomly among the four Prenart systems
(4) Collect two duplicate pairs (two additional samples) randomly among the snowmelt stations
(5) Label as a normal sample with the next odd numbered bottle number:
PP301-13
2/14/06
JDA
MP301-9
2/14/06
JDA
i)
PP301-15
2/14/06
JDA
*Prenart field duplicate samples at site P301 (13 is
the first field duplicate and 15 is the second field
duplicate)
*Snowmelt field duplicate samples
MP301-11
2/14/06
JDA
Field blanks:
(1) Prenarts:
(a) Fill three 125mL Schott bottles with deionized water and carry to the field
(b) Place the three Schott bottles randomly among the four Prenart sites (inside the blue Prenart box).
Leave at sites.
(c) On next sampling trip, collect as a normal sample including pH and EC measurements followed by
transfer to rinsed 125mL Nalgene sample bottle
(2) Snowmelts:
(a) Fill two125mL Nalgene sample bottles with deionized water
(b) Place the two bottles directly beside the sampling set-up of two randomly selected snowmelt
samplers. Leave at sites.
(c) On next sampling trip, collect as a normal sample including pH and EC measurements followed by
transfer to rinsed 125mL Nalgene sample bottle
(3) Label as a normal sample with the next even bottle number:
MP301-8
2/14/06
JDA
PP301-14
2/14/06
JDA
*Prenart field blank samples at site P301
(14 is the first field blank and 16 is the
second field blank)
*Snowmelt field blank samples
ii) Bottle blanks:
(1) Rinse a sample bottle three times with deionized water then fill with deionized water on the day of
sample shipment
(2) Label as:
*First bottle blank
BB-1
2/14/06
JDA
5) Sample Storage
i) At the end of the sampling day (or as soon as possible following sample collection), place samples into cooler
with ice
ii) When you return to the lab, fill out temperature log sheet then transfer sample bags from cooler to PSW
freezer on one of the 3 middle shelves
iii) Put ice packs neatly back into shelves on freezer door
iv) Clear and reset memory on thermometer
(a) See Traceable thermometer protocol for detailed instructions
6) Data Entry
i) Make copies of field notebook and put into binder the next day after a sampling trip
52
ii) Field data is entered weekly into Access database
(a) Located in: ‘Sv1’ (K: )/research/kingsriver/watershed/KREW Database/KREW.mdb
(b) See data entry protocol for detailed explanation
iii) Print and sign Chain of Custody form after entering the week’s field data
(a) Turn form into Chemist
7) Sampling Issues:
i) In the case of small sample volumes, always try to collect the best chemistry sample possible, i.e. sacrifice
Oakton measurements to provide enough water to rinse the sample bottle 3 times
ii) In the event that there is not enough water to rinse the sample bottle three times but sample is still collected –
make a note in the field book
iii) If pH and EC measurements were made with an insufficient amount of rinsing, make a note in the notebook
iv) Recalibrate meter if the standard checks are out of range (+/- 0.5 pH units or +/-10% EC) or if readings
become less stable
(1) Record any Oakton meter checks, calibrations, or problems in the notebook
v) If Snowmelt samples are dry:
(a) Check for ice in the exposed tubing
(b) If funnel is visible, check for clogs and debris
vi) If Prenart vacuum pump is not working:
(a) check power
(b) check battery voltage
(c) check for loose bottle caps
(d) check lines for cracks or damage
(e) check fuses
53
Item 6.
Calibration and Maintenance Procedure of Traceable Freezer Thermometer
7 February 2006
J. D. Auman
1) Purpose
a) When samples are brought in from the field it is important to maintain the correct temperature range to minimize
degradation of samples until shipment and analysis.
b) By maintaining a log of the maximum, minimum, and current temperatures recorded by the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) Certified traceable thermometer on the sample freezer, the storage conditions of
the samples can be carefully monitored
2) Procedure
a) Fill in the date, time, and initials fields on the “Temperature Log Form” on the freezer
b) For current temperature, record value on current screen—this temperature should be within +/-5oC of -20oC
c) For maximum temperature, press “MAX” button and record the value
d) For minimum temperature, press ”MIN” button and record the value
e) Unlock the freezer using silver key hanging on left side of freezer and place sample bags on any of the 3 middle
shelves
f) Return ice packs to the side door shelves
g) Minimize the time that the door is open as this has the largest impact on temperature flux affecting sample
storage!!!
h) Close and lock freezer, remembering to return the key to the hook
i) Clear the memory of the thermometer:
i) To clear maximum temperature memory, first press and hold “MAX” then press “MEM” at the same time
ii) To clear minimum temperature memory, first press and hold “MIN” then press “MEM” at the same time
j) Wait for current temperature to return to near -20oC then press the “MEM” key
k) If “MEM” in small letters appears across the top of the screen, then the thermometer is recording minimum and
maximum temperatures again
l) If “MEM” does not appear on the screen, press the “MEM” key again until it appears
m) As a quick final check, MEM should be displayed on screen, bottom right switch should be in “INT” position,
current reading should be near -20oC
n) When all lines on Temperature Log sheet are filled in, replace with a new sheet
o) Calibration
i) Thermometer is calibrated annually against a NIST certified thermometer by Chemist
ii) For factory calibration and re-certification traceable to National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
contact:
Control Company
4455 Rex Road
Friendswood, TX 77546
281-482-1714
iii) Calibration certificates should be filed in Traceable Thermometer Instrument file upon receipt
3) Troubleshooting
a) If at arrival the thermometer’s current reading is around 20oC (about room temperature), then it is in the
external sensor mode and values should NOT be recorded on Temperature log
i) Action - Put samples in freezer, lock the door and then do the following:
ii) Move the switch on the bottom right to “INT”
iii) Wait for current reading to change to the actual freezer temperature (i.e. around -20oC)
iv) Clear the memory as outlined above and return to memory mode by pressing “MEM” until “MEM” is
displayed on the screen
54
b) If at arrival minimum and maximum values read -40oC and 50 oC respectively and “MEM” is not on the
screen at time of recording, then thermometer is not in MEM mode and values should NOT be recorded on
Temperature log
i) Action - Put samples in freezer, lock the door and then do the following:
ii) Wait for current reading to change to the actual freezer temperature (i.e. around -20oC)
iii) Return to memory mode by pressing “MEM” until “MEM” is displayed on the screen
c) If other problems occur, dead batteries, etc. inform Chemist
d) If temperature flux is large (greater than +/- 5oC) and not explained by the above points, inform Chemist
55
Item 7.
Flow Site Sampling Procedure
28 March 2006
J. D. Auman, T. W. Whitaker
1) Materials
Laptop
Laptop cables
Calibrated Oakton Meter
Sample testing container
Calibration solutions (for mid-day check)
Desiccant
Spare Bubbler
Sample Bottles
Bottle Blanks (if required)
1-Liter Turbidity Bottles
Labeling Tape
Sharpie
Flow Book & pencil
Watch
Shed Key and Yale Key (for P300)
Volt meter
Camera
Screwdrivers
Pliers
Crescent Wrench
2) Procedure
a) Upon arriving at the site, turn the Oakton pH/EC meter on and place probe end into the stream.
b) Record small flume height and note value and time on the data sheet (Fig. 1). If debris or sediment is blocking the
flume, record the staff height before and after removal (allow sufficient time for flow to come down before
recording post-removal height). (NOTE ON DATASHEET THAT DEBRIS WAS REMOVED!)
c)
Record ISCO bubbler height from ISCO control panel and note value and time on the data sheet. If bubbler height
and flume height vary by greater than 0.006 m, double check reading on small flume. If they still do not match,
change value on ISCO to match small flume reading. Be sure to check that they are still the same value before
leaving the site.
i)
Quick Bubbler Troubleshooting Guide
(a) Look for bubbles in flume. If the flume is less than ½ full you will be able to see a bubble every 2
seconds or so. The higher the stage the harder it is to see the bubbles.
(b) Check desiccant and filter.
(c) Can you blow air through the bubbler hose? – This test requires 2 people. It may be frozen. Pour
hot water on the bubbler/flume connection.
(d) Can you make the bubbler work with a short hose in a bucket of water in the shed?
(e) If you install a new bubbler turn off the ISCO first.
(f) Note all bubbler modifications and new installations on the data sheets.
d) Note battery voltage on data sheet.
e)
Disconnect telemetry cable from ISCO and connect laptop to ISCO using the appropriate cable.
56
f)
(If necessary, i.e. telemetry is down or there is no telemetry setup as with P300.) Power up laptop and open
Flowlink5 program from the icon located on the desktop. From the connect screen, click on the “4100/4200/6700
Instruments” button. It will take about 20 seconds or so to connect to the ISCO. Once connected, the site
information screen should open. Press the “retrieve data” button in the lower left corner. It may take several
minutes to download. It is OK to cancel out of the download once the “Reports” section of the download begins.
This takes the most time and includes information that is not relevant
i)
View ISCO Data to See What Samples to Collect
(1) Ideally this step is conducted at the lab and sample bottle numbers are already known. However, if the
telemetry is down and the flows were high enough to constitute collecting ISCO samples then it is
necessary to view the data in the field.
(a) Move your mouse to the left side of the screen with Flowlink open. This should open the window
that displays all of the sites stored in the database.
(b) Click on the “+” next to the site you are at and double-click the “level” tab below the site name. This
should open a graph of water level in the small flume for the site
(c) Click on the “sample event” below the site name and drag it onto the “level” graph that you just
created. This should open a second window in the graph with points that mark each water sample
collected in the ISCO.
(d) To view the most current data, right-click on the graph and select “properties”. This opens the
properties window for the graph. Click on the “time scale” tab. Select “this week” and click “OK”.
It should display the data from the current week. By using the green arrow keys above the graph you
can move back and forward in time. By right clicking and selecting “horizontal zoom” and then
clicking and dragging the mouse you can zoom in on any peaks that you might want to observe.
(e) Refer to the ISCO Sample Selection Procedure (above) for more detailed information on which
samples to select for analysis.
g) Reattach telemetry cable to the ISCO.
h) Label grab sample bottles according to procedures outlined in the sample labeling protocol (below). If additional
samples are required for critical load (P301 only), QA/QC duplicates or blanks, or any grad students (Madeline)
these bottles should be labeled as well.
i)
Each grab sample should be collected near the small flume. Rinse the bottle and cap in the stream 3 times and
then fill the bottle to the neck and seal with the cap (This is currently true for all samples except for Madeline’s
small isotope samples which only require one rinse). Record the sampling time (the time should also be on each
bottle) on the data sheet.
j)
Make sure that the EC and pH readings on the Oakton have stabilized and record pH, EC, and water temp on the
data sheet.
k) Pull ISCO samples selected for analysis from the ISCO sampling rack. All others can be dumped. If sample is
frozen it must be thawed completely before chemistry analysis can be conducted. A stove should be carried for
this purpose.
l)
Collect pH, EC, and temperature data from each of the ISCO samples that are being collected for analysis. Rinse
the cup used for analysis thoroughly up to 3 times using the sample water. Fill cup about halfway and place
Oakton probe into cup. Allow several minutes for readings to stabilize and record pH, EC, and temperature values
on the data sheet.
m) Label a sample bottle according to the procedures outlined in the sample labeling protocol (below) for ISCO
samples. Rinse the bottle 3 times with a small amount of sample water. Fill the sample bottle with a minimum of
50 mL, but no more than above the neck of the bottle.
n) Repeat steps 11 and 12 for any other remaining ISCO samples.
57
o) Once all ISCO samples are collected the ISCO bottles can be dumped. Rinse all bottles using the pitchers found in
each shed and properly reattach the sampling rack to the ISCO unit.
p) Go to the large flume. Record large flume gage height and time on the data sheet. If debris or sediment is
blocking the flume, record the staff height before and after removal (allow sufficient time for flow to come down
before recording post-removal height). (NOTE ON DATASHEET THAT DEBRIS WAS REMOVED!)
q) The laptop should be used to download the data from the secondary recording device (AquaRods or Telogs)
located at the large flume. AquaRods should not be downloaded if precipitation is present.
i)
AquaRod Downloading Procedures
(a) Unscrew the top of the AquaRod case. Power up laptop and connect to AquaRod using the
appropriate cable.
(b) Open the AquaRod4 program from the icon on the desktop.
(c) Click on the “Connect/Disconnect” icon (stoplight) on the toolbar to connect to the AquaRod. It
should change from red to green once connected.
(d) Click on the “download” icon (arrow pointing away from rod) on the toolbar. It may take several
minutes to download.
(e) At the prompt for the file name, save the file as “sitename_month_day_year” in the
c:\watershed\discharge\data\”CurrentWY”\AquaRod folder.
(f) You should also get the prompt “unable to locate calibration file ARxxxx”. Select “OK” and then
navigate to the c:\watershed\discharge\data\AR Files folder and select the calibration file with the
corresponding serial number. This will allow a .dat file to be created.
(g) To view the data in a graph, go to File-Open and navigate to the data file that was just created with
the download procedure. It should open into a graph with water temperature and depth. Check the
graph. Note any anomalies (flat lines, no data, bad spikes, etc.). Close the graph.
(h) If the data looks “good”, free up some memory on the AquaRod by selecting the “Erase” icon (pencil
eraser) on the toolbar. This should delete all data (that has now been downloaded) on the AquaRod.
(i) Whether you erase or not, select the status icon (question mark) from the toolbar and insure that all
the data collection settings are correct. The sampling interval should be 15 minutes and the clock
should match or at least be close to your watch and laptop clock. Close the setup screen.
(j) Click the disconnect icon on the toolbar and go to File-Exit to leave the program.
r)
Telog Downloading Procedures
(1) Remove the plastic cover and rubber connector cap from the telog. Power up the laptop and connect
to telog using the appropriate cable.
(2) Open the Teloggers for Windows program from the icon on the desktop.
(3) Close the “tip of the day” window.
(4) Click the “Communicate with device connected to serial port” icon on the toolbar to connect to the
telog.
(5) Click the “Collect Data” tab and select “Start”. It may take several minutes to download the telog.
(6) When the download is complete, click the “Display Latest Readings” tab and select start. It should
display a real-time reading of the level data from the ISCO. Record the latest reading on the data
sheet and note the time. It should be at this time that you record the large flume reading as well.
(7) To view data, select the “DB” icon from the toolbar. Click the “+” next to the site that was just
downloaded and select the box next to “Chnl 01” below the site name. Click “OK”
58
(8) Check the graph. Note any anomalies (flat lines, no data, bad spikes, etc.). You can zoom in by
selecting the “Zoom In” icon (magnifying glass) from the tool bar and then clicking and dragging
across the graph. Close the graph.
(9) In order to check the telog settings, go to Setup-Recorders. Select the recorder that you are currently
connected to and press “Modify”. Select the “Channels” tab. Note the “Chnl Range” and click the
“Scaling” button (far right). Verify the following settings:
User Units = mm
Channel Point #1 = 0
Channel Point #2 = the channel range (from previous screen) or slightly less
(approximately 0.85 to 1 for 1 psi telogs and 4.8 to 5 for 5 psi
telogs).
Displayed format = ###0.0#
User units point #1 = 0
User units point #2 = 703.6 times whatever the “Channel Point #2” value is set to. This
is height of a column of water required to exert 1 psi of
pressure.
(10) Close out of the Setup-Recorder windows. Select File-Exit to exit the program.
s)
If the stream is currently experiencing high flows and the time is available, wait until the next fifteen minute
interval (i.e. 10:15, 11:30, etc) to record the small flume height. This will make it easier when it is necessary to
correlate AquaRod or telog data to the actual flume height.
t)
Return to the ISCO shed. If there is a turbidity probe present at the site, note the turbidity and temperature values
displayed on the ISCO on the datasheet.
u) Go to the turbidity probe. Make sure probe is not buried and try to position so it is not resting on the bottom of the
stream. Gently clean the face of the probe with a soft cloth. Remove any debris that may have accumulated
behind the probe. Attempt to clear the channel of any sand or rocks that may be inhibiting flow.
v) If a turbidity grab sample is needed, either from previous instruction or a realistic high turbidity value (>20 NTU
and a noticeably turbid stream), appropriately label a 1-liter sample bottle according to the procedures outlined in
the sample labeling protocol (below).
w) Collect the grab sample near the probe location (no rinse required).
x) In addition, an ISCO pumped sample should be collected at the same time and labeled according to the ISCO
turbidity sample protocol (TI-“Site Name”). To accomplish this, make sure you have access to the end point of the
distributor arm inside the unit. Press the “Stop” button (red) on this ISCO keypad. Use the arrow keys to select
“Grab Sample” from the displayed menu. Hit “Enter” button (arrow) on keypad. Set sample volume to 1000 mL.
Place bottle under distributor arm and hit the “Enter” key to begin the grab sample process.
y) Reset the ISCO sampling schedule program. The simplest way to do this is to hit the “Stop Button”. If there is a
“Stop Program” listing on the menu, select that and hit “Enter”. If there is only a “Resume Program” listing on the
menu, select that and hit “Enter”. Then hit the “Stop” button again and scroll to the “Stop Program” listing on the
menu and hit “Enter”. Now select the “Run” listing on the menu and hit “Enter”. The previously program should
now begin.
z)
If you need to change the program on the ISCO, instead of selecting the “Run” menu item, select “Program”
aa) Programming the ISCO – Several Tips
i)
Currently, most sites are set to run a two-part program. The first part focuses on flow samples, the second on
turbidity. Typically part “A” is set for bottles 1-20 or 1-16. In order to prevent unwanted samples from being
collected (and potentially lots of time wasted thawing bottles) the “Enable” portions of the programs are being
utilized. The “Enable” works by not starting the “Flow Module” totals (Set anywhere from 500-2500 m3) to
begin until a certain condition is met. For the flow (Part A) of the programs, this is usually set to turn on the
59
program once a certain water level is achieved. Under the “Enable” options of the programming feature you
are able to select “Level” for enable and then use a “Set Point” to allow the program to initiate once the
“Level” has risen above this point (approx 0.3 m). Since bubbler lines can freeze and cause large, but
inaccurate, level readings at some sites, an upper limit (approx 1 m) can also be set so that the program only
runs when the “Level” is within this range. For the “Set Point” option, the Enable option should be set to
“Once Enabled, Stay Enabled”. For the “Range” option, the “Once Enabled, Stay Enabled” option should be
set to “No”. This allows the program to stop once the level goes out of the set range. For part “B”, the
sampling interval should be set to “Time”. The range is typically anywhere from 30 minutes to 3 hours
depending on the number of bottles designated for Part “B”. The “Enable” portion of the program should be a
“Set Point” type with Turbidity as the parameter (typically >20-30 NTU). All turbidity programs should be
set to “Once Enabled Stay Enabled”. All programs should be set to “Run Continuously”. Avoid changing the
programs unless you have good reason to do so and you are very confident that you know what you are doing.
ii) Once the program is set the way you want it, select the “Run” option and press “Enter”. Note any changes
made to the program on the data sheet.
iii) Check the telemetry setup. The green “DTMF Enable” bulb should be lit on the interface box. The radio
should be set to “Channel 1”. If you have a recharged desiccant pack, replace the old one and note the
removal date on the packet.
iv) Check the bubbler desiccant. A good tube should be dark blue. Red tubes must be replaced. It is good
practice to just replace the tubes (if available) with each visit.
v) Check your data sheet for the site. Make sure it is properly filled out and that any important observations or
problems are noted. Don’t wait until later. You will forget!
vi) Gather your equipment, lock the shed and move on.
Table 1: ISCO Sampling Procedure
Flow Type
Toxic Storm
Flow Description
first storm of season
Base flow
Steadily Rising or
Falling
below 7 l/s
Steady High Flow
daily peaks remain above 20 l/s
Large Storm
peak greater than 30 l/s
divide time period into 5 day flow type
increments and sample as above
noticeable, unstable flux in flow rates
over 24 hour period
Mixed Flow
Erratic Flow
Spring Runoff
8-20 l/s
60
Grab Sample
1
1 every 2
weeks
1 every 2
weeks
1 every 2
weeks
1
1 every 2
weeks
1 every 2
weeks
1 every week
ISCO Sample
2 rising, 2 falling, 2 peak
0
1 every week
1 every week
3-5: 1 peak, 1 or 2 rising limb,
1 or 2 falling limb
depends on flow type
increments
1 every 4 days close to peak
1 every 4 days close to peak
Figure 1 – Flow Datasheet
3) QA/QC Sample Collection
i)
Field blanks:
(1) Stream Grab Samples
(a) Carry a 125 ml bottle of deionized water into the field
(b) At the grab sample site, transfer a small aliquot of the DI water into
(c) the stream grab sample bottle and rinse
(d) Repeat 2 more times
(e) Transfer the remainder of the DI water to the sample bottle and label as described in section (iii)
below
(2) ISCO Samples
(a) Carry a 1L ISCO bottle full of DI water to the ISCO shed
(b) Leave uncapped inside the ISCO sampler
(c) Collect as normal chemistry sample in a 125ml sample bottle during the next visit and label as
described in section (iii) below
61
ii) Field Duplicates
(1) Stream Grab Samples:
(a) Collect an additional sample at the same time that the original sample is being collected (i.e. hold
two bottles while drawing sample)
(b) Be sure to rinse both bottles 3 times
(c) Label duplicate sample one minute later than the original sample as described in section (iii) below
(2) ISCO Samples:
(a) Split one sample into two separate 125ml sample bottles
(b) Label the duplicate one minute later than the original sample as described in section (iii) below
iii) QA/QC Sampling
(1) Stream Grab Samples
(a) Grab samples should be labeled with “SG-“ followed by the site number on the first line. The second
line should contain the date and time of the sample.
(b) QA/QC duplicates should be identical to the original grab sample, but with a time of 1 minute later.
(c) QA/QC field “blanks” of DI water should be transferred into a clean bottle at the stream and labeled
with a time two minutes after original grab sample.
(d) At 301, the critical loads sample should begin with “SGCL”
(e) See Table 2 for examples
Table 2. Stream Grab QA/QC Sample Labels
Grab Sample
SG-P301
2/12/06 10:00
QA “Dup”
SG-P301
2/12/06 10:01
QA “Blank”
SG-P301
2/12/06 10:02
301 CL “Dup”
SGCL-P301
2/12/06 10:00
(2) ISCO Samples
(a) Standard ISCO samples should be labeled with “SI-“ followed by the site number on the first line.
The second line should contain the date and time that the ISCO sample was pumped.
(b) QA/QC ISCO duplicates should be labeled identical to the standard ISCO sample, but with a time 1
minute later than the time at which the ISCO bottle was pumped.
(c) QA/QC ISCO “blanks” should be taken from DI water that was left in an open ISCO bottle left
within the center of the ISCO body. These should be labeled with a time 2 minutes after the first
ISCO sample was taken. Thus, if 4 samples were collected the “blank” would receive a time two
minutes after the first sample that is used.
(d) At 301, any critical loads ISCO samples should begin with “SICL”
62
(e) See Table 3 for examples
Table 3. ISCO QA/QC Sample Labels
ISCO Sample
SI-P301
2/10/06 02:00
QA “Dup”
SI-P301
2/10/06 02:01
QA “Blank”
SI-P301
2/10/06 02:02
301 CL “Dup”
SICL-P301
2/10/06 02:00
4) Sample Storage
i)
At the end of the sampling day (or as soon as possible following sample collection), place samples into cooler
with ice
ii) When you return to the lab, fill out temperature log sheet then transfer sample bags from cooler to PSW
freezer on one of the 3 middle shelves
iii) Put ice packs neatly back into shelves on freezer door
iv) Clear and reset memory on thermometer
(a) See Traceable thermometer protocol for detailed instructions
5) Data Entry
i)
Make copies of field notebook and put into binder the next day after a sampling trip
ii) Field data is entered weekly into Access database
(a) Located in: ‘Sv1’ (K: )/research/kingsriver/watershed/KREW Database/KREW.mdb
(b) See data entry protocol for detailed explanation
iii) Print and sign Chain of Custody form after entering the week’s field data
(a) Turn form into Chemist
6) Sampling Issues:
i)
In the case of small sample volumes, always try to collect the best chemistry sample possible, i.e. sacrifice
Oakton measurements to provide enough water to rinse the sample bottle 3 times
ii) In the event that there is not enough water to rinse the sample bottle three times but sample is still collected –
make a note in the field book
iii) If pH and EC measurements were made with an insufficient amount of rinsing, make a note in the notebook
iv) Recalibrate meter if the standard checks are out of range (+/- 0.5 pH units or +/-10% EC) or if readings
become less stable
(a) Record any Oakton meter checks, calibrations, or problems in the notebook
63
Appendix B: Quality Assurance Project Plan for Aquatic Invertebrate
Bioassessment Monitoring
The Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory in Mammoth Lakes, California, performs the organism collection and
taxonomic classification for this project. Their SWRCB approved QAPP is provided.
64
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Aquatic Invertebrate Bioassessment Monitoring in the Eastern Sierra Nevada:
Development of Biological Criteria for Stream Water Quality and Evaluations of Environmental Impacts and
Restoration Projects in the Lahontan Region
(for the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board)
Program Leader:
David B. Herbst, Ph.D.
Research Biologist
Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory
University of California
Route 1, Box 198
Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546
(760) 935-4536
email: herbst@lifesci.ucsb.edu
LRWQCB Project Officer:
Thomas Suk
Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board
2501 South Lake Tahoe Blvd.
South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150
(530) 542-5419
Problem Definition and Background
Problem Statement. Stream water quality conditions have often been evaluated using chemical criteria, and habitat
conditions evaluated using measures of the physical form and stability of channels and riparian vegetation present. These
features provide useful information on the environmental setting of streams but fail to evaluate the biological health or
integrity of stream ecosystems. A direct measure of the ecological suitability of aquatic habitats can be obtained by
sampling the varied forms of life found on the stream bottom. Aquatic insects and other invertebrates are the most common
organisms used for such biological assessments. Some of these organisms can live and even thrive under polluted
conditions but many others require a clean water environment to survive. The various types of organisms present can be
used as indicators of the health of the habitat. Bioassessment is a tool for measuring stream water and habitat quality based
on the kinds of organisms living there.
Stream biomonitoring has been used throughout the United States and Canada in recent years to determine whether
chemical water quality standards match biological conditions. Often it has been found that biomonitoring measures provide
a more complete method for detecting impaired water quality or demonstrating improvements in environmental quality.
Most states now use stream invertebrates as a regular part of monitoring programs. Several states (Ohio, Maine, North
Carolina, and Florida) have established regional reference streams as biological standards for use in determining water
quality compliance. These programs are resulting in better means for detecting pollution, guiding abatement projects, and
promoting cleaner streams. Volunteer monitoring groups also are becoming active through community programs such as
"adopt-a-stream", local school education projects, and stream restoration work. The objectives of the biomonitoring
program described here are to provide guidance for developing biological criteria for water quality in the Lahontan Region
(Figure 1, map location), refine use and comparability of bioassessment methods, develop a database of reference streams
for evaluating pollution problems in this region, and apply data produced to monitoring of ambient water quality and the
progress of restoration projects. Bioassessment data will also be used to aid in identifying and prioritizing water bodies for
total maximum daily load (TMDL) development, evaluating TMDL-listed streams, and setting biological targets for
guiding management and improvement of water quality.
The Lahontan Region encompasses drainages on the eastern slope of the Sierra Nevada and includes many pristine
watersheds but also a variety of point- and nonpoint-source pollution problems. Among the land uses that may contribute
to water pollution are roads and slope erosion, livestock grazing, drainage from abandoned mines, stream flow diversions,
channelization, and timber harvest. Erosion and sedimentation are primary problems but are difficult to detect and evaluate
with only chemical or physical assessments. Bioassessment collections of the bottom-dwelling organisms of streams are
useful in detecting changes related to sedimentation because scouring and burial of the stream-bed habitat can affect basic
65
aquatic life uses of this environment. Aquatic life use alteration is based on changes in the number of different types of
invertebrates (diversity), and their relative tolerance of environmental impacts and pollution (sensitivity). Monitoring
stream invertebrates in comparison to reference sites (areas having little or no impact but similar physical setting) and/or
over time within targeted sites permits an estimate of impact problems or recovery under changing land use. The method
may be used together with traditional stream channel and riparian monitoring to provide a tool that measures the response
of stream life to habitat changes. When pollution does not originate from a single point ("non-point"), it can be difficult to
measure using chemical methods because this type of pollution usually does not occur continuously and could be missed in
a single water sample. Problems may also exist upstream of a location and not be reflected in the channel or riparian
conditions at that site. The advantage of using stream invertebrates is that they live in the stream and experience everything
that flows over and around them and so incorporate and embody changes in water quality that occur in both local and
upstream areas of the watershed.
Intended Use of Data. The UC-SNARL/Herbst laboratory has collected bioassessment data on hundreds of stream study
sites in the eastern Sierra Nevada since 1992. Sites have been located primarily in Mono County but extend south into Inyo
County, north into Alpine, El Dorado, Placer and Nevada Counties of California, and east into Douglas and Lyon Counties
of Nevada. Data from these sites include physical, chemical and biological data and have been directed at evaluating a
variety of land use and pollution issues including livestock grazing, acid mine drainage, and habitat restoration projects.
The intended uses of these data and those collected within the scope of this QAPP are for several purposes:
 Develop appropriate regional biological standards or reference stream conditions (using samples from a network
of minimal-impaired streams) for different classes of stream types. This database may be used as guidance in
determining the status of streams that may have degraded ecological integrity relative to the defined standards or
biocriteria. The biocriteria may then be used to assess the extent of degradation (or absence of impact) and a target
for gauging the progress/success of ecological recovery following restoration or management actions taken.
 Provide site-specific baseline data for evaluating local restoration projects or management programs directed at
alleviating specific pollution source problems. Examples include livestock grazing management (fencing, restrotation, varied stocking levels) on the West Walker River and Upper Owens River; acid mine drainage in the
Leviathan Mine watershed (chemical treatments of storage ponds), channel restoration on the Upper Truckee River
(erosion control), and TMDL target development for sediment problems in selected watersheds (e.g. Squaw Creek,
Heavenly Valley Creek).
 Evaluate biological integrity of streams exposed to varied levels of livestock grazing and related habitat alteration.
Data would be used to develop specific diagnostic indicators and monitoring strategies for guiding the
identification of streams with degraded ecosystems and tracking changes under different management practices.
This work has been supported by the USEPA and serves as the foundation for the bioassessment program of the
Lahontan RWQCB.
Project / Task Description
General overview of projects. As indicated above, ongoing projects and those initiated in 2000 include development
of a reference stream database for establishing biological criteria, and the monitoring of several specific pollution problems
and restoration progress. Protocols and plans covered by this QAPP include previous work (from 1996 on) and the
following projects:
Projects and Timetable.
Start and Expected
Project Activity
Completion Dates
Biocriteria development based on sampling of selected reference sites for the
1999 - Ongoing
Lahontan Region
Monitoring of grazing management stream restoration on (1) West Walker
(1) 1999 – 2002
River and tributaries – baseline, reference, management contrasts, (2) Bagley
(2) 1999 – 2004
Valley Creek channel reconstruction pre- and post-project study, (3) Bridgeport
(3) 2000 – 2001
Valley reservoir tributaries
Monitoring of erosion control and stream restoration on the Upper Truckee
1998 - 2001
River – baseline, references, and longitudinal contrasts
Comparisons of 3 field and laboratory sampling bioassessment methods used in
2000 - 2002
(1) the Lahontan Region protocol (UC-SNARL), (2) the California Standard
Bioassessment Protocol (CSBP of California Department of Fish and Game),
and (3) RIVPACS- US Forest Service protocol (C.P. Hawkins, Utah State
Univ.). Data will be compared for measures of diversity and community
66
structure, statistical properties, applications of data sets, and potential
conversions between data.
Monitoring of acid mine drainage and mitigations at Leviathan Mine (Alpine
County)
TMDL biological targets for Squaw Creek (Placer County)
TMDL scoping for the upper Owens River (Mono County)
Measurement Quality Objectives (listing of representative measures)
Data Precision, Accuracy, Measurement Range (selected chemical parameters)
Matrix
Parameter
Measurement
Accuracy
Range
Water
Conductivity
0-20 mS
±1%
Water
Dissolved O2
0-10 mg/L
±0.2 mg/L
Water
Turbidity
0-999 NTU
±2%
Water
Alkalinity
0-200 mg/L
±4 mg/L
Water
pH
0-14
±0.01
1995 - Ongoing
2000 - 2002
1999 - 2001
Precision
±1%
±0.4 mg/L
±1%
±4 mg/L
±0.10
Data Precision, Accuracy, Measurement Range (selected habitat parameters), continued
Matrix
Parameter
Measurement
Accuracy
Precision
Range
Stream Channel
substrate
0 – 100%
Est. ±10%
Est. ±10%
composition
Stream Channel
embeddedness
0-100%
Est. ±10%
Est. ±10%
Stream Channel
Riparian cover
0-100%
Est. ±10%
Est. ±10%
Stream Channel
Current velocity
0.05-15 m/sec
Est. ±10%
Est. ±10%
*accuracy and precision based on representative data sets for between-site, multi-year sampling
Data Precision, Accuracy, Measurement Range (selected biological parameters), continued
Matrix
Parameter
Measurement
Accuracy
Precision
Range
Stream Bed
Diversity
undefined
70-95% of site mean
±12%
collected in samples 1-4.
Regression projects 70%
of true diversity in 5
samples for n=100.
Stream Bed
Relative Density
0.000 – 1.000
Underestimate (10-20%?) ±31%
Stream Bed
EPT Index
undefined
Similar to diversity
±11%
Stream Bed
Biotic Index
0.00 – 10.00
±10%
±10%
*accuracy and precision based on estimates from representative data sets for between-site, multi-year sampling for 5
replicate macroinvertebrate samples per site.
Data Representativeness
Water quality measures and habitat features in general are within 10% or less of representing the actual values in nature.
Measures of diversity (total and component) are likely to be underestimates but by no more than 30% of true richness and
this due entirely to rare taxa or those not present in riffle habitat zones. Density is also underestimated, likely by about 1020% due to incomplete capture of some organisms (but use of 250 micron mesh net improves upon other common
collection methods). Index values based on relative abundance are as accurate as precision estimates since they are based
on community composition (relative abundance).
Data Comparability
The habitat survey methods for the chemical and physical environment are similar and comparable to other quantitative
habitat descriptions. The invertebrate sampling methods differ from common used techniques such as River Invertebrate
Prediction And Classification System and California Stream Bioassessment Protocol as follows: finer mesh net (250
micron), replication (5 samples/site), and subsampling (split samples, 250 organism minimum count). Synoptic sampling
67
using all three of the methods has been conducted and analysis will permit comparison of the output of the data sets for
sensitivity in detecting habitat alteration, and calibration of the method employed here to the RIVPACS and CSBP
procedures (permitting conversion to the equivalent data set).
Data Completeness (for each study reach unit)
In each year of stream surveys to date the target number of sites and planned collections have been equaled or exceeded.
Actual processing of samples and data analysis in the laboratory has been delayed in some instances (e.g. Leviathan mine
year 2000 data, 60-75% completed by target date; full completion 4 months late).
Training Requirements and Certification
Field and laboratory technicians are provided with this QAPP document and with detailed SOPs for all protocols used
in field habitat surveys and laboratory sample processing. Prior to each field season the project supervisor involves all
personnel in a training session on each protocol used in physical habitat, chemical, and biological surveys. Technicians
review with one another and the supervisor all protocols, conduct practice sampling, and maintain copies of all SOPs and
their own field notes. Field QC involves regular reviews of sample collection, preservation, and labeling. Laboratory
training involves QC checking of all samples sorted during an initial trial period. When QC of sorts has met standards
(<5% remnant), then 20% (1 of 5) samples are checked for completeness of removal thereafter. Log sheets are used to
track who conducted sorts, QC checks, hours spent on each sort and date, subsample splits, number of animals recovered
and number in remnant check. These data are used for feedback on sorting rate and quality. Each technician maintains a
notebook with copies of keys, notes, and illustrations. All identified sample replicates are reviewed with supervisor during
QC checks (each taxa ID verified, changed, or deleted). The eventual goal is to reduce this from 100% to 20% QC of
identifications. Regular work performance evaluations are conducted to certify compliance with the QC goals of rate and
quality of completing field and laboratory tasks.
Documentation and Records
Records of field stream surveys are maintained on standard forms (attached) for each stream site studied (using “rite-in-therain” waterproof paper). All field records are entered on data forms at the time of the survey. All laboratory records are
also maintained on standard forms (attached) in the form of sample processing logs, data sheets for the determination of
chlorophyll and organic matter (see attached protocol sheets), and lists of all taxa identified. Each individual taxon
identified has an associated certainty level for the confidence placed on the determination - 1= unambiguous distinctive set
of traits, 2= ambiguous but probable, 3= uncertain ID, specimens immature or in poor condition and/or keys ambiguous.
Vouchers one of five sample replicates, and for each invertebrate taxon are maintained in an archived laboratory collection.
Records on data forms are kept both in files and transferred to Excel spreadsheets for analysis. Data are not yet stored as an
EDAS-STORET database (Excel spreadsheets at present) but future plans are to convert to ACCESS or EDAS data
archiving.
Sampling Process Design
Regional reference site selection criteria:
Minimal upstream land use disturbance in watershed above sample reach, gradient less than or near 4% where possible,
elevation 5,000 – 8,000 feet, stream orders 1-4, Sierra Nevada and Great Basin ecoregions. In addition to reference
sampling, surveys of a variety of impacted sites are also part of the monitoring database.
Subject Watersheds: (south to north, eastern slopes Sierra Nevada)
Upper Owens River
Mono Lake basin
East Walker River
West Walker River
East Carson River
West Carson River
Lake Tahoe basin
Lower Truckee River
Sampling Methods Requirements
68
Refer to detailed SOPs and datasheets attached to QAPP – below is a summary overview of the monitoring surveys and
laboratory methods:
The data gathered consist of physical habitat surveys and biological sampling of benthic macroinvertebrates. Each site was
defined as a 150-meter length study reach, located by GPS-UTM coordinates and elevation (near lower end of each site).
The longitudinal distribution and length of riffle and pool habitats were first defined then used to determine random sample
locations for benthic macroinvertebrates from riffle habitat. Slope over the reach was measured with a survey transit and
stadia rod, and sinuosity was estimated from the shortest linear distance between the bottom and top marker flags for the
reach (or aerial photographs of 500-1000 meters of stream length centered on the study reach when stream length was
greater than 40 widths). Physical habitat was measured over the length of each reach using 15 transects spaced at 10 meter
intervals. Water depth, substrate type and current velocity were measured at five equidistant points on each transect along
with stream width, bank structure (cover/substrate type and stability rating), riparian canopy cover, and bank angle. Bank
structure between water level and bankfull channel level was rated as open, vegetated, or armored (rock or log), and as
stable or eroded (evidence of collapse or scour scars). Bank angles were scored as shallow, moderate, or undercut (<30,
30-90, and >90, respectively), and riparian cover was estimated from vegetation reflected on a grid in a concave mirror
densiometer (sum of grid points for measurements taken at each stream edge and at mid-stream facing up- and
downstream). The type and amount of riparian vegetation along the reach was also estimated by qualitative visual
evaluation. The embeddedness of cobble size substrate was estimated as the volume of the rock buried by silt or fine sand
for 25 cobbles (encountered during transect surveys or supplemented with random selected cobbles). Discharge was
calculated from each transect as the sum of one-fifth the width times depth and current velocity at each of the five transect
points, and averaged. Basic water chemistry and related measures consisted of dissolved oxygen, conductivity, pH,
temperature, and turbidity. Documentation also included photographs taken at mid-stream looking upstream at 0, 50, and
100 meters, and downstream at 150 meters.
Biological sampling consisted of 5 replicate benthic samples taken in riffle zones with a 30-cm wide D-frame kick-net.
Each replicate was comprised of a composite of 3 30x30 cm sample areas taken across the riffle transect or over riffle areas
of varied depth, substrate and current. This composite of microhabitats provides a more representative sampling and
reduces the variability among replicate samples. Samples were processed in the field by washing and removing large
organic and rock debris in sample buckets followed by repeated elutriation of the sample to remove invertebrates from
remnant sand and gravel debris. Remaining debris was inspected in a shallow white pan to remove any remaining cased
caddisflies (e.g. Glossosomatidae), snails or other molluscs. Elutriated and inspected sample fractions were then preserved
in ethanol, and a small volume of rose bengal stain added to aid in lab processing. Invertebrate field samples were
subsampled in the laboratory using a rotating drum splitter, sorted from subsamples under a magnifying visor and
microscope, and identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level possible (usually genus; species when possible based on
the availability of taxonomic keys, except for oligochaetes and ostracods). Nematodes and copepods were excluded
because they could not be sampled in a representative way (but presence noted). A minimum count of 250 organisms was
removed from each replicate for identification (in practice averaging about 300-500).
The benthic food resources of stream invertebrates were also quantified in sampling of organic matter and algae.
Particulate organic matter was sampled using a 250-micron mesh D-frame net, sampling stream bottom riffles as above for
invertebrates (3 replicate riffle samples). These samples were poured through a 1-mm screen, with the retained wood and
leaf particle debris then weighed as a wet biomass measure of coarse particulate organic matter (CPOM). The fine fraction
passing through the screen (particle range 250 microns to 1000 microns) was collected in a 100-micron mesh aquarium net,
placed in a sample vial, preserved with formalin, and then dried and ashed in a muffle furnace at the laboratory to quantify
ash-free dry mass of fine particulate organic matter (FPOM).
Algal periphyton was quantified by scrubbing attached algae off rock surfaces using a wire brush, homogenizing the algae
removed using a large syringe, and subsampling the homogenate for (a) chlorophyll-a by filtration through 1-micron poresize glass fiber filters, and (b) archival of algae for cell counts and taxonomic identifications (preserved in formalin and
Lugol’s stain). This was performed on three replicate cobble-size rocks from mid-stream riffle habitats. The area of each
rock was estimated from measures of length, width, height and circumference, and the chlorophyll-a per area determined by
extraction of stored frozen filters in ethanol and reading light absorbance of the extract in a fluorometer relative to a
standard curve.
Appended to the QAPP are the following standard field and laboratory data sheets and protocols, assuring that information
is collected consistently:
Appendix 1: Standard Data Forms
 Physical habitat field survey sheet
 Lab sample processing and identification log
69





Invertebrate identification bench sheet
Algal chlorophyll worksheet
Organic matter AFDM worksheet
Algae AFDM worksheet
Habitat summary sheet
Appendix 2: Field and Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures:
 Physical habitat survey SOPs
 Invertebrate sampling SOPs
 CPOM-FPOM and periphyton sampling SOPs
 Laboratory sample processing SOPs
 Water chemistry sampling SOPs
Sample Handling and Custody Requirements
Samples collected in the field and returned to the laboratory include 5 replicate benthic invertebrate samples (labeled with
stream, site name, date and replicate number), three algal periphyton samples on GF/A filters and three 20 ml samples of
algal homogenate preserved in formalin for taxonomic analysis, three samples of FPOM preserved in formalin, and one
sample of adult aquatic insects collected from stream-side net sweeps. Upon return to the laboratory, benthic samples were
stored in cabinets according to project along with formalin-preserved algae and FPOM, and algal filters were stored frozen
until chlorophyll analysis. All samples were in the custody of the SNARL research operation at all times (field and lab)
from the time of collection to completion of processing, identification and analysis. Benthic samples are tracked using a
log sheet indicating when samples are processed (including time required, splits and total number of organisms recovered),
with initials for who conducted the processing and identifications, and who performed quality control checks of processing
and identifications. Chain-of-custody forms have not been used to date but will be developed for transferring samples to
external laboratories for identification confirmation checks.
Analytical Methods Requirements
Refer to detailed SOPs (appended) for all methods used in field surveys and laboratory analysis. For physical habitat
measures, general references used as background for SOPs were Stream Hydrology: An Introduction for Ecologists
(Gordon et al. 1992; Wiley Publishers), and Monitoring Guidelines to Evaluate Effects of Forestry Activities on Streams in
the Pacific Northwest and Alaska (MacDonald, 1991; USEPA, Water Division EPA/910/9-91-001). For laboratory
methods (e.g. FPOM, AFDM, Chl-a determinations), the general references used were Limnological Analyses, 2nd edition
(Wetzel and Likens, 1991; Springer-Verlag), and Methods in Stream Ecology (Hauer and Lamberti, 1996; Academic
Press).
Quality Control Requirements
Field and laboratory quality control measures include extensive training sessions in habitat surveys prior to each field
season, rotation and cross-checks between observers in paired teams to ensure uniformity in how measures are taken and
recorded, supervisor oversight of all technicians, use of standardized data forms for all records, and availability of written
protocol sheets for all procedures. Replicate samples (5 benthic, 3 algae, 3 organic matter) are currently taken at each site
surveyed, cross-checks of field data forms are made at the end of each survey, 100% sort checks during lab processing of
samples (reduced to 20% when <5% error rate achieved), and 100% re-identification checks with the lab supervisor
(Herbst) are routine. Voucher and reference collections for 20% of samples and 100% of specimens are maintained in
designated and centralized collections. Errors detected during QC are addressed through initialed corrections of data forms
and periodic re-training sessions.
Instrument / Equipment Testing, Inspection, and Maintenance Requirements
The primary equipment employed in the field and lab that require maintenance are Great Atlantic impeller-type current
meters, conductivity meters, GPS units, fluorometer, alkalinity kit, dissolved oxygen kit, and a Helige-Orbeco turbidimeter.
As needed, this equipment is inspected for proper function, replacement of parts, batteries, re-filling of solutions, and stored
at room temperature and dry conditions. In the field, extra parts and redundant supplies are carried to attend to any
malfunctions.
Instrument Calibration and Frequency
70
Regular calibration of field and laboratory instruments is conducted prior to the field season, and then at 2-3 week intervals,
each before each laboratory use, for:
(1) Oakton pH/Con-10 combined probe meter used in field surveys involves 3-point pH calibration (at 4.0, 7.0, and
10.0), conductivity checks with standards, and temperature checks against ASTM thermometers. Prior to
measurement of pH, temperature and conductivity, a 15 minute equilibration of the calibrated Oakton pH/Con-10
combined probe meter is done before recording readings.
(2) Great Atlantic “Ohio-style” current meter, gauged against ratings curves produced by rotation rate of a propellerbased meter.
(3) Helige-Orbeco Turbidimeter calibrated using standard solutions of suspended particles.
(4) GPS units are tested against maps at known locations.
(5) The Fluorometer (Turner model) is calibrated for chlorophyll-a measurements against a standard curve derived
from spectrophotometer-determined stock solution dilutions of fresh spinach or lettuce leaf extracts in ethanol.
Inspection and Acceptance Requirements for Supplies
All shipments received are checked to be certain the packing slip is complete and matches the materials ordered (supplies or
equipment). Standard supplies are stored in designated areas. Most ordering is from the following sources: Fisher
Scientific, Forestry Suppliers, and BioQuip. D-frame nets are made of 250 micron mesh nitex netting and are fabricated
under specific design (18” length, tapered bag) from Research Nets (Washington), using pole and frame ordered from
Wards Scientific.
Data Acquisition Requirements
Data collected from other sources includes use of USGS 7.5 minute maps, aerial photos or orthoquads in some cases,
agency management records (US Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, Soil Conservation
Service, California Department of Fish and Game, USGS discharge monitoring data), and sometimes information provide
by private land owners who have given access permission.
Data Management
Data records are taken on standardized forms for all field and laboratory procedures. After QC checks, habitat and
invertebrate identification data are recorded on spreadsheets (Excel) for analysis. During data entry, sum totals of column
entries on field or lab bench sheets are checked against those sums on the spreadsheet columns. When there is no
agreement, or when clear data outliers are found on analysis, both the sheets and electronic versions are checked for
consistency and corrections made as needed. Back-up records of all field and labsheets are kept as photocopies, stored on 2
computers in different locations, and saved to storage media (zip disks or CD).
Assessment and Response Actions
Field and laboratory personnel are evaluated on a regular review at 3-month intervals. These evaluations include
performance in terms of productivity, accuracy, independence, team-work, and capability. Audits of equipment and
analysis occur during QC checks, data management steps, and comparisons of data quality objectives with actual log
records and data products. Corrective actions for assessment not meeting objectives are described above.
Reports
Reports are produced as required and specified by contracts for various projects. Each report is first produced as a draft for
review by the funding source and any individuals or organizations specified by the source. This review is usually complete
after 30 days, after which revisions are made and the final report generated for distribution to the funding source and any
others specified. Progress reports are made quarterly to the project manager at the Lahontan Regional Water Quality
Control Board. Other reporting times vary by organization providing funding. Reports generally follow the structure of a
scientific paper but often include conclusions and recommendations relevant to management applications of the data.
Extensive graphs and appended taxonomic lists are often included so that the data source may be inspected.
Data Review, Validation and Verification Requirements
Responsibility for data review and qualification is done by the program leader (D. Herbst) and program manager (T.
Suk). This process involves use of the QAPP for defining acceptance or rejection of the data results and conclusions
produced.
Validation and Verification Methods
Refer to QC sections above, assessment, data management, reporting, reviews, and appended SOPs.
71
Reconciliation with Data Quality Objectives
Correspondence of data produced with data quality indicators specified in the QAPP is reviewed during analysis of data
sets. Various corrective actions, as specified in the preceding sections, will be used to address any problems detected. If
revisions of the QAPP are necessary, this document will be re-drafted and submitted to the appropriate agency QA officers
for approval.
72
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Procedure
Select 5 riffles from a random number table along the 150 meter reach. Use the D-net to collect kick samples at ¼,
½ and ¾ of the stream width (always start at the location furthest downstream and work up). Kick an area approximately
30 square centimeters directly above the net (a square area with sides equal to net width). Continue this kick for about 1015 seconds, then rub the rocks by hand for an additional 10-15 seconds (total 20-30 seconds at each of 3 positions = 1-1.5
minutes). If shallow enough just use hands for the full time. After each sample position remove large rocks or wood debris
after washing them in the current into the net. For streams less than 1-2 meters wide, take the 3 kick samples from both
sides and middle above or singly one above another at the random number location (instead of taking all 3 across the stream
when widths are greater than 1-2 meters). Keep in mind that we are trying to sample across different microhabitat types in
the stream including varied depth, current, substrate types – the three composited samples should represent the variety of
habitat present. One or two composits may be taken if samples are dense with debris. The label should then indicate the
number of kicks used (1 or 2), assume 3 if not noted on label. If riffle is not available across the line of each transect, select
representative locations to collect the needed composite sample.
If sampling in pools, take only a single collection within the tail zone of the pool (i.e. downstream third of pool
zone) by sweeping or brushing the sample area into the mouth of the net -this flushing by hand will facilitate collection of
the invertebrates. The net may also be used to scoop through sample area after the sweep. More than a single area sampled
will usually produce too much sample volume to process and preserve.
Quickly dip the net into the stream to consolidate the material to the bottom of the D-net. Pick out any remaining
large debris being sure to remove any attached insects. Invert the net into a bucket with 1/4 to 1/3 full of water. Shake out
the net to collect all the debris and insects (do not dip in bucket water since insects will adhere). Dip net into the stream
again to consolidate remaining contents and flick inverted net into the bucket.
Elutriate (pour off lighter material) with a swirling motion into the other bucket five times. Use only a small
volume of water in each elutriation so the receiving bucket does not overflow. Only rocks and sand should be left in the
original bucket. Empty these rocks into a shallow white pan (or closely examine the bottom of the bucket). Search for
cased caddisflies/snails and add to sample if found (they are heavier and may not pour-off).
Strain collected material through a fine mesh aquarium net supported on one bucket (this may also serve as
elutriation since some sand usually remains). Empty contents of aquarium net into a sample container. Use BioQuip
forceps to scrape any remaining debris into vial. Fill container with ethanol to preserve the bugs. Fill to a level that just
covers the amount of debris. Add a small volume of rose bengal stain.
Label sample jar as shown below, and move on to next sample. (identify as riffle or pool if both are sampled e.g. riffle #1)
Equipment
Stream / Date / Site / Replicate #
Waders and D-net (250 micron)
Example: Convict Creek
Buckets (2) and aquarium nets
lower SNARL
BioQuip forceps and white exam tray
6 VII 95 #1
100% ethanol and Rose Bengal stain
Sampling Protocols for Defined Research Projects:
Kings River Experimental Watershed (collaboration with PSW USFS Research Station)
10 watershed treatment reaches (control, prescribed burns, logging, combination), plus 2 integrating drainage reaches to
examine cumulative effects upstream: pre-treatment and post-treatment data sets
 1 composite sample from riffle habitats: 3 square-foot samples collected from each of 3 riffles within a 100 meter
study reach using a 250 micron mesh D-frame net (9 samples pooled)
 1 composite sample from pool habitats: 1 square-foot samples collected from each of 3 pools within a 100 meter
study reach using a 250 micron mesh D-frame net (3 samples pooled)
 Minimum count of 500 organisms from each sample identified to genus
Yosemite National Park Fishless Stream Surveys, Influence of Exotic Trout
Design compared 21 matched stream-pairs of trout-stocked X natural fishless first and second order streams in YNP. From
each stream reach (150 m length), 5 riffles were sampled as composites of 3 collections each, and 5 pools sampled as single
collections from each. All collections made using a 250 micron mesh D-frame net.
Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park Trout Removals from Upper Bubbs Creek Drainages
73
Four streams under study – three containing trout, one a fishless target stream. Two of the three trout streams will have
trout removed and one will remain as a control. Two years of pre-removal sampling and two years of post-removal
sampling. From each study reach (75 meter lengths), 3 separate replicate riffle samples were collected as 3 square-foot
collections from each (250 micron mesh D-frame net). In addition, 3 replicate pool samples were taken as single
collections from 3 separate pools.
Standard Operating Procedures: Laboratory Bioassessment Sample Processing and Identifications
Fill out log sheet records of samples processed (including initials of sorter/IDer and checker). Each individual should
process and ID all replicates from a single sample reach site.
Minimum count of 250 organisms. Complete counts of any subsamples taken. [average counts will be in the 300-500
range]
Sample Splitting – Split sample to get into target range of organism count (250) but make no more than 3 splits (1/8th the
sample) on the first 2 samples, other samples may use more splits. Use Folsom plankton splitter (rotating drum) and record
number of splits on post-it labels in pencil for sorted samples (post-it placed on sorting tray lids), and on invertebrate ID
record sheets when doing identifications and counts. This is essential to making density calculations from samples. Use a
random number chart to select the sample split to be sorted, and save unprocessed splits until sorting is complete. One of
the unprocessed fractions from the 5 samples taken at a site is saved as a sample voucher (this may be stored in the field
sample container). Adjust sample splits after initial sample to be in the range of 300-500 counted. Be sure splitter is
centered/balanced and inspect splits to verify that splits were equally divided.
Sample Sorting:
Each subsample may be sorted initially by eye or with the aid of an Optivisor or swing-arm lens. Search may then continue
or even begin with microscope scan of samples (10-15X). Small portions of subsamples will be placed into gridded trays
for picking out invertebrates. Only nematodes should not be picked - all others including mites and ostracods should be
removed. Look-alike taxa or broad taxonomic groupings should be placed into separate cells of sorting trays for
subsequent identification. One cell of each tray should be reserved for midges and mites (placed together for later IDs by
Herbst). The cells of this tray should be about half-full with 80% ethanol/ 5% glycerol mix. Very small or early instars of
abundant insects may not be removed completely but as many as practical should be sorted. Following sorting of the
subsample, the unprocessed portion of each full sample should be scanned for large and rare taxa not encountered in the
sorted subsample. A representative specimen of each large/rare (if present) should be put into the sample sorting tray. For
one of five sample replicates sorted (20%), a verification check by another lab worker is required (w/initials) to ensure that
a sample has been completely picked. This should be done by pooling of the contents of a sample as it is picked, then
having a co-worker examine this with an optivisor or under a 10-15X microscope. Records of incomplete sorts (number
missed) should be kept in the log records. This cross-check should be done on the first of each of the five replicates taken
for a stream site (this will establish a search image for the remainder of the set of samples). One of the 5 unprocessed
sample fractions is to be saved as a sample voucher (record the fraction remaining).
If the sample is to be stored in the refrigerator, place a zip-lock plastic bag over the tray and tray lid (w/field bottle label and
# of splits on post-it note) placed over the bag. All 5 samples from a site should be stacked so they can be IDed together
without having to search for each. All placed inside a storage tub.
Sample Identification:
Sorted specimens will be IDed to the lowest taxonomic level possible given the availability of keys. Each identification
will have a taxonomic certainty rating attached to it for use in evaluating problems with taxonomy (see taxa record sheets).
Also record life stage(s) and any notes on ID traits or specimen condition. Uncertain identifications should be checked with
other technicians and the reference collection. Each IDed replicate is stored in a 20 mL vial, then reviewed for QC
verification of identifications with Herbst (technician checking off each ID sheet). The conservative guidance for IDs is not
to push rare organisms beyond a verifiable identity (or exclude/pool). Uncertain taxa and 10% of all samples will be sent to
taxonomic authorities and external labs for final verification and used as part of an archived reference collection.
Representative identified specimens are archived in a reference collection. After data compilation and verifications, all
replicates from a single site will eventually be pooled and permanently archived (80% EtOH-5% glycerol). All
midges/mites from each replicate should be placed in a separate small glass vials, labeled with stream/site/date/ #splits, and
74
stored in a rack for further ID. Ostracods and oligochaetes are not IDed further; copepods are recorded when present but
not counted.
75
Sample
Date
Site Name
Stream
Name
LABORATORY SAMPLE PROCESSING AND IDENTIFICATION LOG
Replicate
#
Sorted
by:
(Initial)
IDed
by:
(Initial
)
&Date
Sort
check
1 of 5
by:
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
76
IDs
check
[ALL]
by:
WATERSHED:
Number
of Splits
Time
Required
to Sort
(+date)
Error
QC#
&
(#/n=%)
STREAM SITE REPLICATE # -
Taxon
Family
DATE Number of Field Kicks Number of Sample Splits -
Genus
species
Counts
77
Life stage
L-P-A *
Lahontan
Biocriteria
2001
ID certainty
level (1.2.3)*
Notes
*[Life stage = LPA, larva-pupa-adult; ID certainty level 1= unambiguous distinctive set of traits, 2= ambiguous but probable,
3= uncertain ID, specimens immature or in poor condition and/or keys ambiguous]
STREAM SITE REPLICATE # -
Taxon
Family
DATE Number of Field Kicks Number of Sample Splits -
Genus
species
Counts
78
Life stage
L-P-A *
Yosemite
Fishless study
2001
ID certainty
level (1.2.3)*
Notes
*[Life stage = LPA, larva-pupa-adult; ID certainty level 1= unambiguous distinctive set of traits, 2= ambiguous but probable,
3= uncertain ID, specimens immature or in poor condition and/or keys ambiguous]
STREAM SITE REPLICATE # Chironomidae
DATE Number of Field Kicks Number of Sample Splits Genus species
Larvae and pupae
Tallies
79
Lahontan
BIOCRITERA
2001
Count
ID certainty
level (1.2.3)*
Water Mites, Hydracarina
Genus
*[Life stage = LPA, larva-pupa-adult; ID certainty level 1= unambiguous distinctive set of traits, 2= ambiguous but probable,
3= uncertain ID, specimens immature or in poor condition and/or keys ambiguous]
80
Appendix C: Periphyton Quality Assurance and Quality Control
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Water Resources Division, in Sacramento, California, is responsible for the
periphyton collection, taxonomic identification, and data analysis and reporting for this project. The periphyton taxonomic
identification is subcontracted to Dr. Yangdong Pan, Portland State University, Oregon.
USGS protocols can be found in the following report.
Moulton, S.R., II, J.G. Kennen, R.M. Goldstein, and J.A. Hambrook. 2002. Revised protocols for sampling algal,
invertebrate, and fish communities as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program. Open-File Report 02-150.
Reston, VA.
This report can be downloaded from http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/
The Periphyton Quality Assurance and Quality Control Plan for Portland State University is provided in this appendix.
81
Periphyton Quality Assurance and Quality Control Plan
At Portland State University Periphyton Lab
Prepared by Yangdong Pan
Goal
The contractor at Portland State University will be responsible for identifying and enumerating periphyton in samples
provided by the client. The contract will provide to the client data files containing the counts and taxonomy of each sample
processed.
Project Deliverables



Excel (and original bench sheets, if requested) files containing data on periphyton samples
List of samples received from the client.
Permanent diatom slides (if requested)
Periphyton Sample Handling, Tracking, and Preparation
As soon as periphyton samples are received, the contractor will examine any discrepancies between labels on the sample
jars and the information provided by the client. A coding system will be developed in the laboratory and both the research
lab coding and the client’s original labels will be used for all data sheets, sample vials, and microscope slides. Using two
coding systems will reduce chances for mismatch. All samples will be sorted and aligned based on coding systems and
stored in a dark and cool area designated only for this particular project.
Each periphyton sample jar will be thoroughly shaken to dislodge epiphytes from filamentous algae and to randomly mix
the periphyton sample (Stevenson and Bahls 1999). A biohomogenizer will be used to aid this process, especially when
filamentous green algae such as Cladophora are abundant in the sample. After homogenization, each sample will be
partitioned into three parts: one for soft-body algae analysis, one for diatom analysis, and one for archiving.
Soft-body algae: Soft-body algae (live non-diatom algae) will be identified and enumerated in a Palmer Counting
Chamber at 400X magnification using a microscope (APHA 1998). Approximately 20 mL of the periphyton samples will
be stored in sealed centrifuge tubes for analysis of soft-body algae. This sample will be homogenized by vigorous shaking
before subsampling and slide preparation. Exactly 0.1 mL of the sample will be transferred to the Palmer Counting
Chamber using a micropipetter. Algae in the Palmer Counting Chamber will be examined at 400X magnification under the
microscope to assess if periphyton is too dense or dilute for identification and enumeration. The original sample will be
diluted or concentrated if necessary to archive desirable cell density (~20 counts per field of view) in the Palmer Counting
Chamber.
Diatom analysis: Approximately 10-20 mL of the periphyton samples will be processed with concentrated sulfuric
acid and potassium dichromate for diatom analysis (Patrick and Reimer 1966). After numerous rinses with distilled water,
cleaned diatom frustules will be mounted in NAPHRAX mounting medium to make permanent slides.
Sample archiving: Approximately 20 mL of the periphyton sample will be archived for non-diatom algae in a vial.
Permanent diatom slides from each processed sample will be also archived. The contractor will digitize common identified
taxa and maintain this image reference collection (voucher collection). The contractor will archive the samples until such
time as the data are verified/validated.
Periphyton Identification and Enumeration Performance Objective
Soft-body algae analysis: A total of 300 algal counting units (live soft-body algae and diatom) will be identified
and enumerated at 400X magnification under the microscope. For colonial algae, each colony will be counted as one algal
unit for purposes of tallying 300 counting units in a count. Cell numbers in each colony will be estimated and recorded in a
82
separate column. For thin filamentous blue-green algae (e.g., Schizothrix) in which cross-walls are often difficult to detect,
a 10 µm length of trichomes will be counted as one algal unit. Individual diatom cells will be counted as one counting unit.
This procedure enables unbiased characterization of algal assemblages which are dominated by colonial or filamentous
algae. Non-diatom algae will be identified to the genus level or species level if possible and diatoms with protoplasm will
be counted but not identified. Major taxonomic references include Prescott (1962), Prescott et al. (1975-1982), Smith
(1950), Drouet and Baily (1956), Drouet (1968), Dillard (1989), La Rivers (1978), Wehr and Sheath (2002).
To estimate algal cell density, we will keep track of the volume of the sample counted in the following way: record
the number of the field of views counted, calculate the area of the field of view using a stage micrometer, and then calculate
the volume of the sample counted by multiplying the area with the depth of the Palmer Counting Chamber. The total algal
cell density (number of cells/counting units per unit area) will be calculated as follows:
The total algal density = [(the number of total counts/the volume of the sample counted) * total sample volume]/the sample
area
Each taxon's density can also be calculated using the same formula except the number of counts will be replaced
by the number of counts for the individual taxa.
Due to limited resolution (live diatom cells) and magnification (400X), it is very difficult to identify diatom to the
species level using the Palmer Counting Chamber. Therefore, the contractor will count live diatom cells as diatom and
calculate the total diatom cell density. To calculate individual diatom species cell density, one will first calculate relative
abundance of each diatom taxa based on 600 valve counts using the permanent diatom slide (see Diatom analysis), and then
calculate each individual diatom species cell density by multiplying the relative abundance of each individual taxon to the
total diatom cell density. The drawback for this approach is that one assumes all diatom cells counted in the permanent
slide are live.
Diatom analysis: A total of 600 diatom valves (300 diatom frustules or cells) will be enumerated and identified to
the species level whenever possible, using current taxonomic references by Krammer and Lange-Bertalot (1986, 1988,
1991a, 1991b) and others (e.g., Patrick and Reimer 1966, 1975). Diatom valves will be identified and enumerated at
1000X magnification under the microscope with a Differential Interference Contrast (DIC) device.
QA/QC plan: A minimum of 10% of the samples will be randomly selected for cross-analyst examination. In
other words, one out of 10 periphyton samples analyzed by one contractor will be analyzed by another analyst
independently. Discrepancy between the two analysts will be discussed and reconciled if an agreement can be reached. If
not, the samples will be sent to another expert for identification.
Precision will be assessed using two approaches. First, independent taxonomic identifications of the same sample
(using the same micro-slide) will be made to assess analyst’s counting error. Second, multiple subsamples of one sample
(using several micro-slides) will be analyzed to assess processing error during slide preparation. The contractor will use
Bray-Curtis (BC) similarity index to measure consistence between analysts. The index has been used for diatom QA/QC in
the water quality program (Kelly 2001). Kelly (2001) suggested that level of Bray-Curtis similarity >60% typically
indicates a good agreement between the analyst and auditor. Based on the contractor’s own research, the level of BrayCurtis similarity >70% between the samples analyzed by different analysts may be achievable. The major reason to set up
the accepting the Bray-Curtis similarity index at 60% or 70%, instead of 100%, is because that diatom cell distribution
within a slide is not homogeneous as indicated by one of the studies conducted in the contractor’s lab. The same analyst
counted the same slide three times. Each time, the analyst started the counting from a different and randomly selected
location on the same diatom slide. The average BC was 79%. More attention will be given to common taxa (>1% of total
relative abundance). The contractor will correctly identify at least 95% of the common taxa contained in each sample.
Voucher collection plan: Permanent diatom slides with detailed labels will be stored at Portland State University
after the contractor finishes identification and enumeration. A subsample of 20 mL of each preserved periphyton sample
will also be collected in centrifuge tubes (50 mL) and archived.
Verification of unknown samples plan: Diatom slides with questionable taxa will be coded in a standardized way.
The questionable taxa in the slide will be marked using an objective lens equipped with a diamond marker. All
measurements on the questionable taxa will be made (e.g., length, width, number of striae/10 m, etc.). If the questionable
83
taxa are large enough, the taxa will be digitally photographed. The marked slides with other descriptive information will be
sent to experts for positive identification. For soft-body algae, a vial with the preserved sample will be sent to experts
along with all measured information and images. The contractor will also visit several museums with good diatom
collections (e.g., Philadelphia Academy of Science and California Academy of Science) to discuss some questionable or
new taxonomy with the experts there. Unknown taxa or taxa with high taxonomic uncertainty will be digitally
photographed using the imaging system. The images will be archived for QA/QC and sent to other experts for further
identification. If diatom taxa are too small to be scanned using the imaging system, scanning electron microscope may be
used for further identification, or microslides with marked unknown taxa will be sent to experts for identification.
Data Management
An automated data management system is used for this project. The analyst uses a counting software to record the
periphyton names and their counts. The data stored in the counting software can be directly transferred to a data
management system to produce the report with a desirable format.
References
Dillard, G. 1989. Freshwater Algae of the Southeastern United States. Vol.1-5.
Drouet, F. and W. A. Baily. 1956. Revision of the Coccoid Myxophyceae. Butler
University Botanical Studies 12:1-218.
Drouet, F. 1968. Revision of the Classification of the Oscillatoriaceae. Monograph 15.
The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
USA.
Kelly, M. G. 2001. Use of similarity measures for quality control of benthic diatom
samples. Wat. Res. 35: 2784-2788.
Krammer, K., and H. Lange-Bertalot. 1986. Bacillariophyceae. 1.Teil: Naviculaceae.
VEB Gustav Fisher Verlag Jena,
------. 1988. Bacillariophyceae. 2. Teil: Epithemiaceae, Bacillariaceae, Surirellaceae.
VEB Gustav Fisher Verlag Jena.
------. 1991a. Bacillariophyceae. 3 Teil: Centrales, Fragilariaceae, Eunotiaceae,
Achnanthaceae. VEB Gustav Fisher Verlag Jena.
------. 1991b. Bacillariophyceae. 4 Teil: Achnanthaceae, Kritische Erganzungen zu
Navicula (Lineolatae) und Gomphonema. VEB Gustav Fisher Verlag Jena.
Patrick, R. and C. W. Reimer. 1966. The Diatoms of the United States. Volume 1.
Monographs of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, No.13,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
------. 1975. The Diatoms of the United States. Volume 1. Part 1. Monographs of the
Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, No.13, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
USA.
Prescot, G. W. 1962. Algae of the Western Great Lakes Area. Wm. C. Brown Company
Publishers, Dubuque, Iowa, USA.
Prescot, G. W., H. T. Croasdale, and W. C. Vinyard. 1975. A Synopsis of North
American Desmids. Vol. 1-3.
La Rivers, I. 1978. Algae of the Western Great Basin.
Simonsen, R. 1987. Atlas and Catalogue of the Diatom Types of Friedrich Hustedt.
Vol.1-3.
Smith, 1950. Freshwater Algae of the United States.
Stevenson R. J. and L. L. Bahls. 1999. Periphyton protocols. Rapid Bioassessment
Protocols for Use in Wadeable Streams and Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic
Macroinvertebrates, and Fish. (Eds. M. T. Barbour, J. Gerritsen & B. D. Snyder).
Second Edition. pp. 6-1-22. EPA 841-B-99-002 United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D. C.
Wehr, J.D. and R. G. Sheath. 2002. Freshwater Algae of North America: Ecology and
Classification. Academic Press.
84
Appendix D: Riverside Chemistry Laboratory’s Analytical Methods
Unless stated differently in Table 8 (Element 13) the USDA Forest Service’s Riverside chemistry laboratory follows the
Environmental Protection Agency’s analytical methods that are provided in this appendix.
85